A leisure card for children and young people - an active and meaningful leisure time in community with others

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Every child deserves a good childhood and good upbringing conditions in a family where the parents go to work and support themselves and the family, but where there is also time to see and affirm the children.

Children naturally need to have requirements and boundaries set, and norms and values conveyed about what is right and wrong and how to treat others. But above all, all children need to grow up in a loving home with engaged parents, in a home where there is room to grow.

Security in the small also provides security in the large. Secure families and parents with time for the children, good values and hope for the future lay the foundation for a secure and good society more than anything else.

But there are many more important protective factors in our children's lives, both when it comes to creating conditions for safety and when it comes to promoting physical and mental health. It is about positive role models, friendships and a meaningful leisure time. Our children need to be offered a context where they can feel joy, community and that they have a natural place where they are allowed to be someone.

"One wants to be loved, in the absence of that, admired, in the absence of that, feared, in the absence of that, loathed and despised. One wants to instill some kind of feeling in people. The soul recoils from the void and wants contact at any cost."

So writes Hjalmar Söderberg in Doktor Glas.

"I wanna be somebody" sings Blackie Lawless in W.A.S.P. in the song with the same title.

To feel a sense of community and to be someone in relation to others is deeply human. Our society needs more solidarity and community. We want our children and young people to be in contexts where they are given the freedom to grow and feel that they are someone. It is among other things against that background that the Riksdag today will make a decision on a completely new reform, the so-called fritidskort.

The leisure card of 500 kronor per year shall give all children and young people between 8 and 16 years of age increased access to sports, culture, outdoor life, and involvement in children's and youth organizations. The activities shall be continuous and leader-led. More young people can in this way get a share of a meaningful leisure time which we know is a protective factor when it comes to preventing young people from committing crimes, but the purpose is also to counteract mental and physical ill health among children and young people.

Every fourth parent has cut back on their children's leisure activities as a result of the high costs for them, and of course, it is a problem if the parents' economic vulnerability or exclusion constitutes a barrier to the children being able to participate in an activity. The link between reduced physical activity and mental ill-health is now well-established.

Therefore, the leisure card will be differentiated. It will mean a full 2,000 kronor for children who grow up in economically vulnerable families and who need the support the most. Introducing a leisure card where we vary the amount in that way is a new way to try to reach the children whom the association life does not reach today, those who do not join the sports team or who quit because it costs more than the family can manage.

Madam Speaker! In light of how criminals seek to secure public funds, a certain concern has been directed towards the proposal. I have great respect for that and think it is good that such fears are raised. Such things must be taken most seriously, and I have myself posed that type of question. The new system must, of course, not be able to be abused so that money intended for children's leisure activities instead ends up in the pockets of criminal gangs. We have seen far too many examples of that. Therefore, it is good that the government has taken extra time and that it has been announced that one has now built a well-thought-out model to minimize such risks.

All the associations and activities where the leisure card can be used shall be collected in an operator register, and in order to be included in the operator register, the activity must have existed for a number of years. All associations included need to be approved recipients before they can be considered as operators. This means that they have undergone an extra check to be able to do so. It is therefore not possible to create an association for the purpose of obtaining quick money with funds from the leisure card.

Madam Speaker! In conclusion, I believe it is good that the government dares to try new paths so that more children can have good upbringing conditions. We have seen that what has been done previously has not been sufficient. Sports and association life provide children not only with movement and conditions for physical and mental health but also a sense of community that nurtures, strengthens, and conveys important values about hard work, doing one's best, about cooperation and respect for others, about believing in oneself and the importance of contributing to the common good.

Yesterday, I had the privilege of accompanying my four-year-old son to football practice. It is his first football season, and as a father, it is one of the highlights of the week to be able to join him and see the joy that the sport provides.

I want more children to experience the same sparkling enthusiasm and anticipation on the way to practice, that more children should have the opportunity to hear their names called out and give a high five to the coach during the roll call. I want more children to be able to celebrate together when the ball has landed in one goal or the other.

If more children get to experience the same joy thanks to the leisure card – either because people currently refrain because they cannot afford it, or because more parents open their eyes to how important a meaningful and leader-led leisure time and physical activity actually is – the reform would be a great success with great significance for the individual children and a positive impact on society.

Therefore, I move for approval of the proposal in the Social Affairs Committee's report.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! I am replacing Anne-Li Sjölund in this debate.

I thank you for the speech, Christian Carlsson. I agree with many of the intentions that the member highlighted, and I do not doubt for a second that this is about wanting the best for children, strengthening joy and community, strengthening movement, strengthening development, countering mental ill-health and getting more people to feel good.

However, I doubt the intention regarding civil society and the trust in civil society. This is not the first example we see where the Tidöre government distrusts civil society and in different ways wants to control it or withdraw funds from it. We have seen it previously regarding study associations, which have been subjected to cuts of 500 million kronor. These are funds that could have gone to activities for children, young people, and people with disabilities, but one has chosen to withdraw them.

In this case, it is about building up a new system with an enormous control apparatus linked to Swedish association life, with large costs associated with this, a large administration and a large bureaucracy.

Money that is supposed to go to children's leisure activities should not go to criminals, the member said in their speech. But it is obviously no obstacle to letting the money go to administration and bureaucracy, which they do to a large extent in the proposal.

Madam Speaker! Why do the Christian Democrats distrust civil society?

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! No, the Christian Democrats do not distrust civil society. We are a party that pursues an active policy to precisely strengthen civil society. But it is clear that when incorrect payments and fraud occur, and when different sectors are exposed to criminal actors who try to profit at civil society's expense, who try to grab taxpayers' money, one needs to be prepared to take measures to ensure that taxpayers' money goes to what it is intended for.

When we introduce this reform, it is also important to ensure that there is a good control function. The reason we do not choose to continue in the old ruts is that we see that there is a large gap between children today. Many get to participate in important leisure activities, but far too many others do not get the same opportunity. Sometimes it is because one does not have the economic resources. Sometimes it is because one simply does not have parents who value it.

We are ready to try something new so that more children can have this opportunity. That is why we are introducing a specific leisure card with funds linked to the individual child. We provide financial support so that more can have the opportunity for a meaningful leisure time and also show normatively that it is important and something to prioritize.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! I understand that one wants to build a system where criminal actors cannot pilfer taxpayers' money. I think we all agree on that. At the same time, I have not heard the government parties and the Christian Democrats express any criticism towards, for example, the Swedish Sports Confederation, which today is the major payer of money to large parts of the association life.

Now a new structure is being built where associations must be approved in a complicated, bureaucratic system in order to be able to share in the money for the leisure card. Försäkringskassan has estimated that the IT costs for this amount to nearly 300 million kronor. These are funds that could have gone directly to the association life.

The total administrative cost for the leisure card is estimated to – lend me your ears, Madam Speaker – be 1.8 billion kronor until 2031. It is 1.8 billion that should go to bureaucracy and administration, when it could have gone directly to children's and youth activities, scouting, outdoor activities, choir singing, drama, creating, and so on. Instead, we are to spend enormous sums on administration.

As said: I do not doubt the good intentions of the Tidö parties, but sometimes when conducting an investigation, one must also see that this might not be the best way to use the taxpayers' money. The best way to use the taxpayers' money to increase the possibility of leisure activities in Sweden is perhaps to send the money to the associations, which are the ones carrying out the activities, and not to the bureaucracy. Why do the Kristdemokraterna want to spend so much money on administration and bureaucracy instead of sending it directly to the children's leisure activities?

(Applause)

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

Christian Carlsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! New reforms are often associated with costs. In this case, two perspectives have been very important when we have developed the reform.

One thing is that the leisure card shall be offered in such a way that it is user-friendly. We want people to take advantage of this opportunity. Therefore, a digital service has been developed which, to the greatest extent possible, shall result in an automated procedure. It also contributes to lower costs over time, even though the initial costs will naturally be higher.

The second perspective is precisely what we have talked about, namely the importance of ensuring that the system cannot be misused, but is efficient and legally secure.

The reason why we choose to introduce this reform, I have touched upon previously, but I am happy to repeat it again. It is simply a matter of that if one adds more money to the existing system, it will indeed be good for civil society. It benefits the children who already have a leisure activity. But the purpose of this is to reach new target groups of children who today do not have the opportunity to take part in association life and do not get the opportunity for a meaningful leisure time. Therefore, the government is now taking this step.

We hope that this will lead to more children feeling a sense of community and joy that allows them to grow and that the whole society actually also benefits from.

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

Azadeh Rojhan (S)

Madam Speaker! Creating good conditions for children's leisure time is about more than money in hand. It is about structures, contexts, and people. Therefore, we Social Democrats believe that this reform, the leisure card, is starting at the wrong end.

The Swedish sports movement does not function like a company where a service is purchased and delivered. No, the sports movement is built on something completely different: voluntary commitment, local anchoring, and leaders who give of their time on evenings and weekends so that children and young people can have a meaningful leisure time. It is parents who train children's teams, youths who referee matches, and passionate individuals who keep the association life going throughout our long country.

Madam Speaker! If there is no coach waiting or a hall to train in, it does not matter how much financial support a child receives, because the opportunity to actually participate is still not there. The leisure card does not provide new facilities. The leisure card does not provide new leaders. These are challenges that the sports movement itself highlights as extremely critical. The leisure card risks becoming a costly dead end and eroding functioning structures.

Madam Speaker! At the same time as the government presents a leisure card as a solution to make children's leisure time cheaper, there is an economic policy that hits the families who are struggling the hardest the hardest. Food prices, electricity bills, and rents have increased sharply. Parents in low-income families struggle every month to make ends meet. High-income earners have been compensated for inflation through tax cuts, but for children in socioeconomically vulnerable households, leisure time has become a privilege rather than a right.

It is expensive to be poor, and in that reality, a leisure card does not go very far. At the same time, the sports movement is also affected by inflation. Associations are forced to raise membership fees, rents for halls and fields are rising, and material costs are increasing.

The activities have also become more expensive, both for the children and for the associations that are to receive them. It is a double pressure that requires structural solutions. Against that background, the leisure card appears as an expensive symbolic gesture without any real substance.

How much money will this system swallow just to function at all when costs are increasing everywhere? How much must the state contribute so that the value of the support is not eroded year after year? And the most important question of all: Where will this money come from, if not from broad, long-term investments in the entire sports movement? It is a dangerous path to let an administrative system with high fixed costs eat up the space that should go to the activities themselves – to the halls, the leaders, and the associations.

Madam Speaker! We Social Democrats also feel a genuine concern regarding the commercialization that this reform risks driving forward. Fundamentally, it is about a view of children's leisure time as something that can be carved up, priced, and put out to tender, as if children were customers and leisure activities were a market commodity. When the support is tied to the individual instead of the activity, the child is reduced to a price tag. Different actors, large and small, are expected to compete for the same hundreds of kronor. With that logic, those who already have a strong market presence, professional administration, and the capacity to quickly adapt to new requirements are favored. But it is rarely those actors who operate where the needs are greatest.

It is a systemic shift we are talking about – from solidarity-based, people's movement-based association sports to a market-driven support system where it is the child's role as a consumer, not its participation in a community, that stands at the center.

We Social Democrats say no to that development. We believe in community before market and in long-term support for the activities that reach children where they are – not in a system where children are forced to chase support and associations compete for survival.

Madam Speaker! When the government's leisure card reform was delayed and the money was instead temporarily distributed directly to the voluntary sector, it ironically achieved far more concrete results in a short time than the leisure card as a system can deliver in the long term. This should have been a clear indication of what actually works. But unfortunately, these investments were not part of the government's long-term policy. These investments were one-off measures with funds that were already earmarked for the leisure card but could not be used because the reform was not in place.

This is, frankly, absurd. Just these temporary solutions demonstrated with all desirable clarity that real results are achieved when we start at the right end – when we invest in the activities, the people, and the place where leisure actually becomes a reality for children and young people, instead of on symbolic politics that is layered on top of structural problems.

Madam Speaker! We Social Democrats want to invest in what matters: in people, meeting places, and opportunities.

We want, preferably together with the other parties in this chamber, to find a long-term and cross-bloc solution to the growing infrastructure problem in our country. It is not sustainable that this issue, which is crucial for the sports movement, is constantly postponed. A national grip is required – a strategy that recognizes that access to sports facilities is a prerequisite for sports for all to be able to become a reality. A broad political consensus and a common will to act are needed here.

Furthermore, we Social Democrats propose direct investments in the sports movement where it is needed. That is why we are putting forward a proposal to increase the support for sports by 645 million kronor. Of these, we want 345 million to go directly to association life, with a particular focus on disadvantaged areas and rural areas. We propose 100 million for para-sports for children and young people, 200 million to train 1,000 new volunteer leaders, as well as increased resources for youth leaders, outdoor life, and cultural schools.

Madam Speaker! We are convinced that this is how we create an equal, meaningful and inclusive leisure time for all children in Sweden – not through the leisure card, which threatens to weaken the voluntary association life that for generations has upheld our democracy, cohesion and community.

That is also why I move for the rejection of the bill and for the approval of reservation 1.

(Applause)

In this speech, Lawen Redar (S) agreed.

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

Emma Ahlström Köster (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Azadeh Rojhan, for a, shall we say, engaged speech! But I really do not recognize myself in your description of reality. I am myself active in sports and a club parent, but I do not recognize the reality you describe.

The Chairperson speaks about deficiencies in Idrottssverige, in Föreningsverige, such as problems and challenges regarding premises and leaders, and what she says is correct. It is a constant challenge to be able to measure the need and the demand that exists. But this is by no means a new problem that has arisen now, but it has been so for a very long time.

I would like to remind Member Azadeh Rojhan and the Social Democrats of how things looked just a few years ago – let us take the eight years that the Social Democrats were in power. During that time, children's active leisure time decreased. The number of sports hours decreased. According to the Swedish Sports Confederation, participation dropped from 37 to 28 percent during exactly these years, while sedentary behavior increased significantly and screens made their entrance and took our children's time.

I wonder: Does member Azadeh Rojhan and the Socialdemokrater consider this to be a truth that in no way can be linked to the policy they have pursued? How does one reason regarding the fact that sports declined if the commitment is as great as the member claims in her speech?

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

Azadeh Rojhan (S)

Madam Speaker! I am not surprised that Emma Ahlström Köster does not recognize herself in the reality I describe. We have two completely different starting points. The member is Moderate, and I am Social Democrat. I see different solutions than the member regarding the societal challenges that exist.

Regarding the reduced participation mentioned here, we all know that the pandemic had a far-reaching effect on participation in Föreningssverige overall. It is to manipulate the figures to now refer to the reduced participation in this debate. It is also a way to shift the debate to be about something other than what is being done here and now in order to actually achieve real changes.

If we want to achieve real changes, and if Emma Ahlström Köster nevertheless agrees with the reality that the sports movement itself describes regarding the lack of leaders and a major infrastructure problem across our entire country, one should also be willing to proceed with the investments that were made when the money was not used for the leisure card reform. We see what fantastic results it has yielded. Then Emma Ahlström Köster and the Tidö parties could have stood here and been very proud of the investments they made to increase the number of participants and to reach new children and young people.

But those are not the investments we are standing here and talking about today, unfortunately, for they were temporary. Instead, we are talking about an administratively very heavy reform, which will cost 2 billion in just administrative costs to implement. In the long run, I do not know how far the money that is actually intended for the reform itself will go when it comes to reaching more children and young people.

Can Emma Ahlström Köster answer the question of where the money will come from in the future, if not from the broad sports movement?

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

Emma Ahlström Köster (M)

Madam Speaker! It is true that I and the Tidö parties have a different solution to the problems we see. But that was not what I began my question with; it is the problem picture that we do not share. We agree that there are problems and challenges with premises and that leaders need to be recruited for every generation, but you are forgetting an important part. You are forgetting the large proportion of children and young people who do not feel welcome, who do not find their way to Föreningssverige, who do not grow up in a family with a tradition of sports and who do not feel that there is anything for them – when we have a unique association life in Sweden, which has the capacity, the knowledge, the will and the ambition to receive them. This is the main problem, and that is why we have different solutions.

The leisure card is tailored to reach exactly this group, the one that the Social Democrats do not talk about. You speak broadly about broad problems and challenges that we all agree on, but we also talk about this group, for whom it may be most important of all to find their way into sports.

I want to assert that the Social Democrats have rather shaky credibility when it comes to sports issues. Very little happened during the eight years that the Social Democrats were in power. I understand that one does not want to talk about that today, but rather wants to talk about what is here and now. But it is about credibility in the politics that is being conducted.

Nothing had happened. We did not reach that group. The statistics were clear. The arrow pointed straight down – the number of sports hours decreased. The group that stood furthest away took another step away. I think the Social Democrats should be a bit humble and themselves reflect on whether there is anything in the ambition to reach this group. Could it be that the leisure card will actually succeed because reforms that have already been made during the last two years have succeeded in reversing the trend?

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

ANDRE VICE TALMANNEN

I just want to remind that we address each other by first and last names or "the member".

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

Azadeh Rojhan (S)

Madam Speaker! It is precisely because we do not believe that this reform will reach the children and young people who are furthest away from the sports movement, from the association movement altogether, that we do not believe in it. For what does it matter if children and young people come and knock and say "We want to join, because now we have received a reduced association fee" if there is no leader who can receive them, no facility that works, and no times at the facilities? What does it matter then?

Reaching the children and young people who are furthest away from the sports movement is not solved by a reduced membership fee; it is solved by ensuring that there are leaders who can work outreach-wise and be active in the areas where children and young people are located. The leisure card does not solve that problem at all. The leisure card is just a reduction of the membership fee – that's it. Then it is supposed to take care of itself.

In what way will a leisure card that provides a reduced membership fee cause the families that Emma Ahlström Köster herself mentioned, who are not accustomed to sports and who do not have that culture, to suddenly acquire that knowledge and experience? No, we have structural problems, and it is those that we need to address.

We must ensure that there are leaders who can work outreach. We must ensure that there are facilities where there are times for children to practice sports. We must ensure that new groups are reached by sports and find the joy in the community that it entails. The leisure card cannot solve this.

(Applause)

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Madam Speaker! Today is fundamentally a very good day, when the Riksdag makes a decision on a leisure card for all children and young people in Sweden between 8 and 16 years old, and where those who are in particular economic vulnerability receive extra much on their cards. But when I listened to Azadeh Rojhans' speech here, there was no end to the fault-finding and the disaster-mongering surrounding this, but it is simply wrong. That 120,000 children who live in economic vulnerability receive 2,000 kronor that can only be used for an active and meaningful leisure time in Swedish association life is therefore wrong.

I am surprised that the Social Democrats have not heard the children's rights organizations that point out that fees are a major problem for these children. One has not heard the people who themselves have said that it was completely ruled out to participate in multiple sports and that they had a lump in their stomach every time the membership fee was to be paid. This we have heard from Swedish elite athletes. I am surprised that one has not spoken with the associations that say they will be able to use this in their recruitment to point out opportunities for those who are in financial vulnerability.

Facilities and trained leaders were also mentioned. How much extra did the Social Democrats invest in facilities during their eight years in power? We have invested an extra 130 million kronor in that. All around Sweden, we have refurbished, renovated, expanded, added to, and made facilities ready so that more people can come.

It is the same thing with the training of leaders. We have invested several hundred million to prepare for the leisure card so that all children can participate. But now, it is threatening the association life that 120,000 children get a greater opportunity to participate. This is something I genuinely wonder about.

(Applause)

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

Azadeh Rojhan (S)

Madam Speaker! That I have no restraint when it comes to finding errors cannot be my responsibility; rather, the problem lies with the reform, which has so many errors that can be pointed out.

That we have not heard the children's rights organizations or heeded the problems they raise is not true. We are critical of the proposal precisely for that reason – that the children's rights organizations talk about the households' strained finances and how it affects the children. But Jakob Forssmed has no answers to those problems. The government does not address those problems at all, but on the contrary, pursues a policy that causes the households' finances to shrink ever more. You cut the housing supplement but give the children a leisure card. If you really had wanted to see the children's vulnerable situation, you would not have cut the housing supplement in that way. Families with children are now entering the summer with less money.

I have visited sports districts that tell me about their fears regarding the leisure card, namely that the associations will now raise membership fees as the leisure card is introduced. The associations also have a strained economy that they need to make work, and the leisure card risks leading to them instead raising the fees to meet the increased costs, because there is now an opportunity to do so.

My question is: How will the government meet that development? Will the amount that children receive on the leisure card be increased to meet the membership fees that are now being increased instead? What incentives do associations have to not increase them?

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Madam Speaker! The support aims to protect children's active and meaningful leisure time. It is about creating a support that does not compete with the grocery bill or the electricity bill. We know that children who reach the age of ten, eleven, or twelve begin to take responsibility for the family's finances, but it is a responsibility that children should not have to take.

Then one can say that all families should have a much better economy, and I can absolutely imagine investments to make that possible, which the government is also doing. But we want to safeguard this, and we want to create the effect that the children feel: This is a support that is only for me. It is I who am in the association. This support means that I do not need to wonder if mom or dad can afford this.

We are creating great opportunities for associations to purchase equipment that they can lend out, through the leisure card funds that we work with. We are also investing in sports in vulnerable areas, and it is a permanent investment, not a project, to strengthen the association life where it has not been strong enough.

It is about building community life, recruiting leaders, and creating structures that make this possible in the local communities. Then we add the leisure card on top of this to reduce the risk of children abstaining because the fees are too high. We know that they are too high for many, and therefore we do this.

We will, of course, follow the development of the fees, and we are already doing so today. It is something that concerns us. Here, the associations need to work. We maintain all support for the sports movement. We have increased them and are not averse to making further investments, but the leisure card for all Swedish children between 8 and 16 years old and the special support for those in vulnerable situations will make a difference. I believe that even Azadeh Rojhan and the Social Democrats realize this, despite all the errors they find.

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

Azadeh Rojhan (S)

Madam Speaker! We in the Social Democrats repeat that this is starting at the wrong end. I maintain that, because the infrastructure to receive any new children and young people is not in place. There is a shortage of leaders in our vast country, and we have an enormous construction problem. With the problems that exist today, it will be very difficult for the sports movement to receive new children and young people. This is not something that I am saying, but it is something the sports movement itself says. It is the criticism that they primarily put forward.

If one had started at the right end and made major investments to tackle the structural problems we see within the sports movement and then perhaps presented a proposal like this, we would have had a completely different discussion. This is an enormously cost-driving reform, and it is very difficult to see where all the money is going to come from.

Now Jakob Forssmed says that we have to follow the price developments, which means that this reform can only become more and more expensive. Where will the money be taken from? Does the sports movement need to be worried that the broad investments to build a strong sports movement will be omitted because this reform will only spiral out of control and become incredibly costly? Where will the money come from?

No, unfortunately, I can do nothing but state that the government takes with one hand and impoverishes the household economy for those who have it hardest, and then gives a little bit with the other hand through a symbolic policy in the form of a leisure card. One does not look at the structural problems that exist within the sports movement, but instead comes up with a proposal that is a bandage on the wounds. It is the wrong way to go.

I agree that we should have found solutions to the facility issues, but I am prepared to do this together with the other parties to help the sports movement.

(Applause)

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

Anna-Lena Hedberg (SD)

Madam Speaker! To begin with, I would like to move for the approval of the Committee on Social Affairs' report A leisure card for children and young people.

Belonging to a group, an association, or a team, or having the opportunity to learn to play an instrument and find one's creative vein, allows one to have an active and meaningful leisure time in community with others. In a dream world, every child, regardless of where in the country they live and regardless of fees for the activities, would have the opportunity to participate in what they are specifically interested in. Unfortunately, that is not the case in our country.

Being part of a meaningful leisure activity counteracts mental ill-health. It builds up our creativity and sense of belonging. It is important for all of us, but especially for our young people. Their physical health, mental well-being, social competence, self-esteem, identity, cognitive development, school performance, as well as knowledge regarding structure and time planning, are things that lead to lifelong habits and networks that they will hopefully take advantage of for the rest of their lives.

It is not always easy to be young today and have the opportunity or the financial means to participate in important leisure activities. The economy in many families is severely strained today, and they do not have the possibility to let the children participate in any leisure activities at all.

We have long seen that it is extremely important for young people to have a meaningful leisure time in strong community with others. It is, as said, fundamental for both physical and mental health and for young people to grow into the Swedish community with pride and self-confidence.

Madam Speaker! Today, four out of five children move too little. Surveys show that five-year-olds sit still for an average of nine hours a day. More and more reports are arriving about Swedish youth who have more stress, anxiety, and psychosomatic symptoms than ever before, and there are clear gender and socioeconomic differences.

Clinical diagnoses and drug treatments have continued to increase, especially among young women. While suicide rates among young men remain stable, there is a worrying increase among young women. The stigma of seeking help is still strong, but more people are using support lines and digital services. School, family, and accessible first-line support are highlighted in the research as the most effective arenas to curb the development. This, and that young people have a meaningful leisure time, strengthens and builds up public health.

Madam Speaker! In the government's proposition A leisure card for children and young people – an active and meaningful leisure time in community with others, a new law is proposed regarding a state support in the form of a leisure card, which shall be administered by Ehälsomyndigheten. This is the largest investment in a long time to get children and young people moving and to strengthen their opportunity to have a meaningful leisure time.

The purpose is to increase children's opportunities to have an active and meaningful leisure time together with others, something that both the Public Health Agency and the Children's Ombudsman highlight as important for mental and physical health. It is particularly important for children in socioeconomically disadvantaged households and for children with disabilities.

The Sweden Democrats therefore welcome the government's ambition to increase children's and young people's participation in sports and cultural activities. More participants means increased revenue for clubs, cultural schools, and other providers, which in turn can finance better leaders, equipment, and facilities.

The government has already allocated 256 million kronor to the Swedish Sports Confederation (Riksidrottsförbundet) in preparation for the introduction of the leisure card (fritidskortet). The support to the Swedish Sports Confederation is used for four different areas: reinforced activities in socioeconomically weak areas, recruitment and training of leaders, increased accessibility for persons with disabilities, and sports facilities and sports environments. In 174 municipalities across the country, 432 facility projects could be granted support during the previous year, a support that has already made an enormous difference in a short time.

In addition to the leisure card giving young people a chance to engage in an activity they otherwise would not have been able to afford, it will strengthen the role of community life throughout the country. Swedish community life, sports clubs, scouts, and cultural schools are invaluable carriers of Swedish culture, tradition, and democratic upbringing. With earmarked support, we increase the chance that children from homes with lower incomes get to be part of this community instead of being drawn into passivity and criminal environments.

The requirement for the card is that it shall be able to be used for fees in organized, leader-led activities that provide security, quality, and natural encounters across socioeconomic and cultural boundaries.

The proposal to include the card in the law on the obligation to provide information to counter incorrect payments is positive. The Sweden Democrats have long pushed for sharper tools against benefit fraud and organized crime.

Madam Speaker! The Sweden Democrats want to see a Sweden where all children, regardless of postcode, can afford to play football, to learn to play the violin, guitar, drums, or whatever they are passionate about, or to discover the adventures of the outdoors together with a new friend. A well-designed leisure card can become a springboard to just that community and at the same time strengthen Swedish culture and cohesion.

We look forward to a review of the leisure card where it is shown what benefit it has brought to our youth and that our demands for an active and meaningful leisure time in community with others meet our objectives in the bill. The Sweden Democrats stand behind the bill so that we can together secure an active, meaningful and clear Swedish leisure time for the next generation.

(Applause)

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Anna-Lena Hedberg, for the speech!

In the election, the Sweden Democrats talked very much about Sweden's countryside and how they would improve things for Sweden's countryside as soon as they came to power. Sure, we saw when the election was over that gasoline prices were lowered for everyone, not just in the countryside but in the whole country. But after that, it ended.

The great inequality in healthcare has not been leveled. No specific investments have been made there that have led to better care in the countryside. The inequality in school has not been leveled. No investments have been made there that have led to greater equality between city and country in school results. Meeting places and cultural initiatives in the countryside have been actively opposed by the government through the cuts to the study associations. It was precisely the countryside, together with people with disabilities and pensioners, that was hit the hardest.

Will the leisure card help young people and children in Sweden's countryside? We know that in the countryside there are fewer actors within the association life. Fewer associations in Sweden's countryside have less opportunity to handle administration and bureaucracy. There are fewer facilities and longer distances there.

What is needed are investments to strengthen the possibility of building up facilities. One needs to strengthen the possibility for leadership in associations and give money directly to the association life. The leisure card risks, on the contrary, increasing the gaps between city and country. Therefore, I wonder, Madam Speaker, why the Sweden Democrats want to increase these gaps when they went to the election on a platform of strengthening Sweden's countryside.

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

Anna-Lena Hedberg (SD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Bergenblock, for the question!

It is unfortunate that the Center Party criticizes an initiative aimed at giving more children and young people access to a meaningful leisure time. Regardless of background or the parents' finances, there are large gaps due to great distances in the countryside, and we made a major investment there through the reduction of fuel costs.

Every saved hour that a child gets to participate in an extracurricular activity, I consider to be a won hour, and we should see that as a victory. None of us know what exactly this hour does and what it leads to.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! I hope that the Speaker, the audience in the chamber, and all of you sitting in front of the TV screen heard that the rural initiative for the Sweden Democrats was lowered fuel prices. It was simply nothing more. You lower the fuel costs, and then you hope that it solves all the problems in the countryside. It has nothing to do with healthcare, school, cultural activities, or leisure activities.

The Speaker thinks it is unfortunate that the Center Party criticizes the proposal for a leisure card. But it is clear that it should be criticized when it is a bad proposal! As I said in a previous exchange of remarks, I do not doubt the ambitions. I do not doubt that one actually wants to make it better for children and young people. But the leisure card is not the way to get more children and young people into leisure activities. And above all, it is poor management of money, because so much money is spent on administration and bureaucracy.

The figures I mentioned earlier of 1.8 billion in administrative costs until 2031 were the costs for the state. The costs for the voluntary sector were not included. The voluntary sector will also drown in administration and bureaucracy when it has to be approved in the system and report back to the state. That specific part hits the small associations particularly hard, and the risk is great that many associations in our rural areas and in our sparsely populated areas will simply see it as hopeless to register as an actor and therefore will not do so. Then it becomes a double injustice, and these funds will be lost in the rural areas.

I therefore find it very difficult to understand how the Sweden Democrats, who claim to want to protect Sweden's rural areas and sparsely populated areas, in practice do not do so.

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

Anna-Lena Hedberg (SD)

Madam Speaker and Member Bergenblock! Our initiative to lower fuel prices is not the only initiative. It is one of the initiatives.

I want to counter the claim that the leisure card would be a cumbersome administrative solution. It requires a certain amount of handling, but it is a weak argument against a reform that aims to give all children and young people equal access to leisure activities.

We already see today, following our investments in 432 facilities in 174 municipalities, that this makes a big difference for sports clubs all over the country. It is not just about the big cities but also about the countryside. We see that the leisure card will be of great help for parents and children when it comes to gaining a simpler entry point to leisure activities.

(Applause)

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

Vasiliki Tsouplaki (V)

Madam Speaker! The differences between children's living conditions are great in today's Sweden. Far too many grow up under meager conditions and without the possibility of an active leisure time. This morning, Sveriges Radio reported that 189,000 children live with at least one parent who has debts with Kronofogden. The figure has increased by 9 percent since 2022. These are alarming figures.

Vänsterpartiet welcomes the commitment to strengthen children's access to a meaningful leisure time. We think it is important that the issue is debated and that we arrive at solutions. The leisure card is actually the issue I have debated most often during my time here in the Riksdag. I have consistently had a cautiously positive attitude and hoped that the investigation work that has now been ongoing for some years would lead to more children getting the opportunity for a leisure activity.

Unfortunately, I must stand here today and list all the deficiencies I see with the leisure card, as it is designed in the reform proposal. Extensive criticism has emerged from various sides both during the process and before the final result. The criticism has, among other things, concerned that the system is designed too complicatedly and that it does not cover all children. The criticism also concerns that several different types of associations fall outside the system and that large parts of the funds allocated for the reform will need to be used for administration instead of direct activities. Just Försäkringskassan's part in the system is estimated to require 160 employees to monitor organizations that are already approved in other parts of our association life system.

I think, as I have said, that the basic idea is good. From Vänsterpartiet, we want to lower the economic thresholds for an association activity, but we believe that it would have been possible to solve this in another way.

Madam Speaker! The design of the system means, as we have heard earlier, that children living in households that received housing allowance during the previous year shall receive a higher amount, 2,000 kronor instead of the 500 kronor that applies for others.

Vänsterpartiet views the possibility for families with fewer economic resources to receive greater support positively as a result of this differentiation. At the same time, it must be said that the proposed amount is so low in relation to the economic deteriorations that the sitting government, together with Sverigedemokraterna, has implemented for the worst-off households that these will still fare significantly worse than before.

From July 1, the housing allowance will change significantly. The housing allowance is also not a perfect indicator of where the needs are greatest, as people are sometimes forced to choose not to apply for housing allowance even though they are entitled to it. It is a demanding allowance, and the risk of being liable for repayment is large and deterrent. There are also those who, despite a weak economy, do not have housing allowance for other reasons, for example because their housing situation does not allow for an application.

The number of recipients of housing allowance has also decreased successively over the years, and the forecast says that it will continue to decrease. This is because the income limits in the system are too low and are not being adjusted. This ultimately means that the group entitled to the special leisure card will decrease over time, and I do not believe that was the government's intention.

The government has, in the budget for 2025, scaled down and phased out the supplementary grant in the housing supplement. During the first six months of the year, it is reduced from a maximum of 2,100 kronor per month to 1,300 kronor per month. From July 1, that is in a few weeks, it will be abolished completely. The person who receives the special leisure card will therefore be in a much worse economic situation than before as a result of the government's policy.

At the same time, the costs of participating in sports have increased significantly over the last two decades, as we have heard earlier in the debate. The cost of a main sport has increased by an average of 68 percent since 2009 and is around 9,400 kronor per year. As you understand, one does not get very far with the leisure card. The costs differ, of course, between different sports and between where in the country one lives. The Swedish Sports Confederation says that it varies between 5,000 kronor and 25,000 kronor per year depending on where one resides.

The reports from the Swedish Sports Confederation also show that membership fees are generally low and that it is the costs for travel and training fees that are high. In some sports, it is the equipment that stands out, and camps and competitions account for a large part of the costs. I can state that the proposed system with leisure cards for 500 or 2,000 kronor eases the cost burden but is completely insufficient for a large part of households today.

Madam Speaker! I also want to say something about the lack of sports surfaces and premises for practicing sports or other activities, as well as the lack of leaders. The Government has partially tried to handle this during the years that have passed of the mandate period, but I also see that they have kept their fingers crossed so that there would be large amounts of unused sports halls at the schools.

A report has been requested from the Centre for Sports Research. When it was presented, it turned out – which many of us who have been local politicians could already say – that the accessibility to these sports areas is generally already good for sports life. On the other hand, they are not always adapted to the different sports' needs, and it is difficult to find available times for children's activities.

What else do we need to bring up? There are so many concerns with this. Now we have talked a lot about sports. We also need to talk a bit about culture, because the other major activity expected to be part of this system is the municipal music and art schools. Many of these are also plagued by structural problems with long queues and a shortage of educators.

The parties that today constitute the government base actually already stopped the expansion of places for cultural school educators within the so-called Kulturskoleklivet during the previous parliamentary term. The risk is therefore great that the funds allocated for reforms for the leisure card will go to children who already have a place in a sports club or a place in a cultural school course.

This means that one will strengthen the economy for those households that already today can afford leisure activities, but one will not be able to let in other groups that one says one wants to reach.

Madam Speaker! Another deficiency in the proposal is that it does not apply to all children but only to children between 8 and 16 years of age. It also does not apply to all children who are placed in foster homes, because it is assumed that the child will live with their guardian. The proposed age limit has the effect, among other things, that children who are in the same class have different rights to the leisure card. That is a concern.

We also see that the design is poorly adapted to the cultural associations, and I think the government has not really answered how they view their role. Given that study associations have been forced to cut back significantly in their music activities, which have reached a young target group, I think it is extra unfortunate that that question is not addressed.

Overall, you hear that the shortcomings in the proposal are too extensive in relation to the advantages. Therefore, I conclude that Vänsterpartiet needs to demand a rejection of the proposition. I move for approval of reservation 1.

Madam Speaker! Time is running out now, but I also think I need to say something about our proposals. One cannot just stand here and complain about the government if one does not have any policy of one's own to counter with, I think. We have a number of proposals. I will not have time to list them all. We do, however, see that economically weak households, above all, need to be given improved opportunities for work with good working conditions and reasonable wages.

For those who cannot work, or for other reasons have a weak economic situation, there need to be robust safety nets to ensure a good existence and opportunities for children to have an active and meaningful leisure time. We see that we need to increase the housing allowance and the child allowance. These are some of the proposals we see would have greater significance for children's living conditions and leisure time than the proposed leisure card.

We also see that poorly functioning markets – such as the grocery trade, the electricity market and the banking sector – need to be regulated in order to lower the unreasonable costs that households are forced to pay today.

I sit in the Culture Committee during the day and have to jump in here for the Social Affairs Committee's debate. In the Culture Committee, we make a number of investments within culture and sports. The conditions for civil society generally need to be improved.

I do not have time to list all the proposals, but there are many initiatives in our budget that both reach the culture school and sports, and which also ensure that we make targeted initiatives for a child group that is left out due to inaccessibility. This concerns targeted initiatives for para-sports. I also want to highlight this, as it has not been mentioned earlier in the debate that we need to ensure that this group gets increased access to both cultural and sports activities.

I conclude by saying that I also hope that we see an increased dialogue between the state and the Swedish Sports Confederation regarding these high fees, because the voluntary sector also needs to do its part so that more children can participate in sports.

(Applause)

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Madam Speaker! I want to start by saying that I appreciate Vasiliki Tsouplakis's reasoned tone in the speech. We arrive at different conclusions. I, the government, and the coalition parties think that this is very urgent. We find it difficult to see the negative in that all children receive this support – not least that 120,000 children who are in financial vulnerability receive an extra large support, as we know that this is a real obstacle for many children today.

We can discuss the general economic direction and different types of support. The Government sees the vulnerable situation for families and has also said that we are following this closely and are prepared to return with measures. But if we discuss the leisure card specifically, we will – regardless of the situation otherwise – protect these funds specifically for children who really need to participate and where the cost today is a barrier.

I share the view that the sports movement and sports clubs always need to consider this: Who do we not include in the community, and how can we change the activities so that we do not build up unnecessary barriers? If we have an app that requires the latest iPhone, perhaps we should reflect on that. Where do we place the cups? Do we need to travel to Copenhagen, or can we travel to the neighboring municipality to give everyone the opportunity to participate?

It is not always the children who drive this development, but there can also be other motives behind it. These are important things to continue discussing.

I want to say a few things. The member mentioned 160 employees at Försäkringskassan. A figure of 1.8 billion has also been mentioned. These are old figures from March 2024. Since then, we have made a number of changes that have been able to press down the ongoing management costs by half, so that means those figures are outdated.

My question to the member is whether it is not good, even with these concerns, that 120,000 children in vulnerable situations receive 2,000 kronor that they can use in Swedish association life?

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

Vasiliki Tsouplaki (V)

Madam Speaker! I think it would be very good if it were really the case that these children could also be given a place in an activity. That is what both we and the Social Democrats are raising here in the debate. When we look out over Föreningssverige and Kulturskolesverige, we are very curious about how this will actually happen. Having a right to something does not mean that the opportunity always exists.

That is why I highlight the concern with, for example, sports surfaces, where I believe the government should have done more. We heard in previous remarks that the 250 million that Riksidrottsförbundet received during this period have been of great use. What we can see when the money goes directly to the organizations is that very much is achieved for quite small sums.

But when the money is instead tied up in expensive IT systems to administer the card – different IT systems that have to talk to each other and talk to the associations' systems – it is obviously very expensive. There, we would have wanted to see a different construction, where more money could have gone out into association life and benefited the children and where less ended up in the bureaucratic systems.

I am pleased that the Minister expresses that it has been possible to reduce the costs that have previously been described in the underlying documents that we have been able to access prior to the processing of this reform. My concern is that the opposite effect may occur when it turns out that it is actually full in the associations and when the queues are so large in the culture school.

Could the Minister say something about that? Will you expand the investments in Kulturskoleklivet so that we get more educators? Will it continue to be invested money so that more leaders can be trained? Friluftslivet, for example, wants a different arrangement regarding the social fees so that they get equal conditions as, for example, the sports movement and can recruit leaders on the same terms. It is such things that we lack in the reform.

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Madam Speaker! Those questions really do not lack merit. The point is that we are creating long-term, good conditions for Swedish association life. The support that has existed previously remains in place. The difference is that we were able to add an extra 130 million to premises and facilities and to refurbish, renovate, expand, and build new.

It is the same thing with leadership recruitment, which both Riksidrottsförbundet and Svenskt Friluftsliv – but also Kulturrådet – have been able to use to prepare for the leisure card. It is, of course, not possible to rule out that different types of measures were needed.

I have also mentioned sports in vulnerable areas. Sports in vulnerable areas truly contribute to being able to strengthen the association life where it has not been as strong as in other areas.

With that, I also want to say that I think this image of there being no associations in Sweden that are prepared to receive more children is completely wrong. There are heaps of associations that want to receive more children and that have the possibility to receive more children.

Do we have a problem with too few facilities? Yes. Do we have a problem with too few leaders? Yes. But it is clear that there are opportunities in this, when more children – not least in vulnerable areas – get the opportunity, and when we now strengthen the association life. There are plenty of associations that now have completely different opportunities than a couple of years ago to be present, to be super-local, and to be able to welcome children into the activities.

With the leisure card, they get an additional tool. I have spent the last week talking to several clubs that say that this is very good and that they can use it in their recruitment of new children. They want to use the leisure card in the recruitment. They are not saying that they cannot take in a single child because they lack capacity, but they say: We want to take in more children, because we see what the association life means for them.

The children who do not have that association with a club today can get it via the leisure card. It's not that bad, is it?

(Applause)

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

Vasiliki Tsouplaki (V)

Madam Speaker! There are very many good intentions in this, which I also said in my speech. The problem is perhaps that one does not get the whole picture and does not build the chain all the way.

I received no answer regarding social security contributions and the culture school. As someone who has come into contact with many cultural associations, I know that people think it is good that the culture school is included. But what about the children who have a cultural interest? There is a very heavy focus on sports both in the government's work and in the minister's post here. I would like to know a bit more about this, because many children do not want to play sports and compete. Instead, they want to do something else. This has been the crown jewel of the minister's work during the mandate period, and the risk is that other initiatives will not have room and will be squeezed out – among other things by the IT systems that I have described.

I also want to point out that the support that went to RF to, among other things, train leaders and upgrade facilities was oversubscribed by three times the amount of money. The needs are therefore completely enormous, and I would like to see initiatives from the government when it comes to the facilities issue. This has been pushed for many years, and as I perceive it, there has been a broad political consensus that we should have a local facilities fund similar to the one that exists in Denmark.

The issue has been investigated by several ministers, and now there is a small center that is to spread information and knowledge. But why can one not get muscles and resources to support municipalities and associations in developing new facilities? It does not need to be huge sums – we see that 250 million could help – but it would be a lubricant from the state level out to the municipalities and the associations to get more facilities in place that are accessible and suit future sports. That is where we need to see changes.

I am therefore still missing some answers from the government's side. I hope they will come in the Minister's statement later in the debate.

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

Emma Ahlström Köster (M)

Madam Speaker! Thousands of leaders, new construction projects, support for socio-economically weak areas, equipment and training to support sports for persons with disabilities and movement-inspiring school projects. These are some of the initiatives regarding sports that have been made so far during the current mandate period.

In total, it is about 250 million kronor that have been used within four specified, important areas: activities within socioeconomically weak areas, recruitment and training of leaders, accessibility for persons with disabilities, as well as sports facilities and sports environments. 250 million kronor is a large sum, Madam Speaker, and the money is targeted. Why? And why just now?

During the period 2014–2022, when the Social Democrats were in power in Sweden, children's and youth's participation in sports decreased. According to the Swedish Sports Confederation's own figures, participation among young people fell from 37 percent to 28 percent during these eight years. At the same time, sedentary behavior increased significantly, and more time was spent on screens.

One sees primarily three reasons for this. It concerns increased costs and high fuel prices, changed interests where individual training sometimes pushed out club sports, and socioeconomic differences where children from families with lower incomes have had a lower participation rate. At the same time, we see worrying trends regarding the mental health of children and adolescents, as well as among young adults, and differences in health and living conditions between groups with different educational backgrounds.

After only two years with Ulf Kristersson's government, the downward trend has actually been reversed. Now, slightly more children and young people are practicing sports. Above all, it is more young girls and girls, and among those living in socially vulnerable areas, it is now slightly more who participate in an activity. As a parent, this warms my heart.

Madam Speaker! I am traveling around Sweden and visiting various associations and groups that work with children and young people, and they confirm the reversing trend.

I visited, among other places, Ystads Simsällskap, a swimming club that has existed for a long time but which is also at the forefront. There I met a girl who was wheelchair-bound but who had just completed a training session together with her peers. She was tired but satisfied to have completed the day's challenge and was on her way home to eat dinner. She is one of the group and trains together with peers who are not wheelchair-bound. Representatives for the club say: We have chosen this model. It provides a strong sense of community and broadens young people's understanding of differences.

I also visited Vätternrundan here this week and met young people who ride BMX. Two sisters, a seven-year-old girl and her sister aged nine, said: It is super fun to ride BMX, but we didn't know that before. You have to try first before you know what you like!

It should be a priority for politics to actively work so that more people find a home – so that more people discover something in our Föreningssverige. That we have now turned the trend somewhat shows that purposeful work makes a difference, that it matters who governs and that it matters what measures are taken.

Madam Speaker! If one wants to reverse a negative trend, one cannot do more of what one is already doing. If you are driving in the wrong direction, it doesn't help to step on the gas; instead, one must stop and dare to take a different path. During the current parliamentary term, the government has made several initiatives in the sports field – not one initiative, but several.

Among other things, Idrottsklivet has been introduced, which is a three-year initiative that started in the autumn of 2023 with an annual grant of 100 million kronor to create leisure activities in vulnerable areas, that is, for the group that is furthest away from sports. In cooperation with the police and with low thresholds for participation, more people have through this project found a new sport and a new community.

Madam Speaker! I mention this to demonstrate and once again emphasize that the leisure card is not the only initiative the government is undertaking, but a continuation of a path already laid out.

Even though most have already heard about the card and know that it will be launched this autumn, there may be those who still wonder what this leisure card is. My short answer is: It is the government's message to Sweden that children's and young people's leisure time is important.

The somewhat longer answer is that the leisure card is an offer of support to cover the cost of a leisure activity. The leisure card is a targeted initiative for children and young people between 8 and 16 years old, with particular support and focus on those living in economic vulnerability. The leisure card is also a carefully scrutinized reform with a well-thought-out model. Among other things, one must be approved as a provider and then be included in a register for a number of years in order to participate.

Madam Speaker! Let us think for a short moment about the children who have not found their way into organized sports or who stood on the outside during the last parliamentary term. To stand on the outside of an active leisure time is much more than not practicing sports or not learning an instrument. Those children have not had the opportunity to develop together with others. They have not had the opportunity to discover a new activity.

They may have missed out on growing up and being raised in a democratically organized activity, which is important for understanding how democracy works. They may have missed the opportunity to find role models or to themselves become a role model for others. They have not experienced the feeling of a "we" in a team or perhaps getting to win. They have also missed the opportunity to make new friends of different ages and from other parts of the country. Perhaps they have not been able to develop their physical fitness or other abilities in the way they could have.

Madam Speaker! Childhood is, like the teenage years, an incredibly important time and phase in our lives. Here we shape who we are and lay the foundation for continued development.

I am proud to represent a government that sees and takes concrete action against sports exclusion. I am proud to represent a government that clearly shows that children's health and social well-being is a priority here and now, but also for all the future. With the leisure card, more children can be welcomed into Föreningssverige.

(Applause)

In this speech, Johan Hultberg, Malin Höglund, Thomas Ragnarsson and Jesper Skalberg Karlsson (all M) concurred.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! I thank Member Emma Ahlström Köster for the presentation.

I agree with much of what was said. I know that the member has a great commitment to outdoor life, sports, culture, and issues regarding functional disabilities. This is very important to give children and young people the opportunity to lead an active leisure life. I understand that these are issues that the Moderaterna prioritize in the government's work.

Something that the Moderaterna, however, do not usually prioritize is administration and bureaucracy and spending the state's money on things that sometimes perhaps cost more than they provide. I understand that the Moderaterna do not rule alone; if they had done so, it might not have been exactly a leisure card that was launched. We know the Sverigedemokraterna's contempt for civil society and know what they stand for. We also know that the Kristdemokraterna would rather see things administered via the state, but the Moderaterna usually do not go that way.

The chairman just spoke about how 250 million have gone to the Swedish Sports Confederation and had an immediate effect in the form of money for facilities and strengthened leadership. The administrative costs for the leisure card are estimated at approximately 250 million kronor per year. Even if the costs were to be somewhat lower than that, it is a very large amount of money that will be spent on administration.

Why, Madam Speaker, do the Moderates want to spend so much money on administration and bureaucracy under the state's direction?

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

Emma Ahlström Köster (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank Christofer Bergenblock for the question.

It is completely correct that the Moderaterna want to work for reforms that are effective. For Moderaterna and the government, it is important that the money we collectively put into a system ensures that we get something out at the other end.

It is incredibly important that this reform lands correctly. That is why the government has prepared for its arrival with many targeted and preparatory initiatives.

It is clear that it is unfortunate when things cost a lot in administration, but it is also important for the Moderaterna and the government that we have a system where criminals cannot utilize the money that is supposed to go to our children. It is important that it is well-prepared. That is also why it has taken a long time to get this in place. We want to prepare and lead the way, and we want a system that is legally secure. But sometimes it takes time when one does new things and introduces new reforms, and it costs in the beginning. The reason is that it must land correctly and become effective in the long run.

The most important and greatest purpose of this reform is to reach those who are furthest away. If it had been the case that we could reach them by doing what we already do, the leisure card would not have been needed. But as I pointed out in my speech, there is a large part that stands very far away and that we do not reach in the usual way, with the usual investments and with the usual money. We need to do something else.

I know that the government is following the implementation. We will also follow this and update what effect it has. Of course, adjustments will be made and evaluations will be carried out to ensure it becomes even more effective in the future.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! It is certainly good to try new ideas, but it is also good to look at the structures that already exist. We heard in the presentation how one uses the existing structures by injecting money into the Swedish Sports Confederation (Riksidrottsförbundet) to be able to build up community facilities and strengthen leadership. In the same way, it is of course possible to inject money to reduce the socioeconomic gaps in society and reduce the gaps between city and country without building up a bureaucratic colossus in the form of a leisure card.

I understand that it is always fun to be able to highlight a completely new name, a completely new concept, and a completely new reform, but even from the government's side, one must sometimes step back, look up a bit, and consider whether it will turn out well in the end. Are we putting the state's money in the right place in the end? Are we using the taxpayers' funds in a wise way in the end?

When one raises their eyes and looks at the leisure card, the answer is that you do not do it. You are building up a new model which, just as the member says, shall ensure that criminals cannot get access to the money. With this model, there is therefore a risk that criminals can get access to the money, and therefore one needs to build up an even larger administration around the whole thing.

We do, however, have a functioning system today – through the Swedish Sports Confederation, LSU, the Folkbildningsrådet, and the outdoor organizations – which we could have utilized. We could have given the money directly to them so that it would be put to work in the same way as it was with the 250 million. This money should not be spent on bureaucracy but on building up facilities and on strengthening children's and young people's opportunities for a life of leisure.

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

Emma Ahlström Köster (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank Christofer Bergenblock again for the question.

I think the question is justified. It is important to weigh this. Are we doing the right thing, and are we achieving the purpose that we want to achieve?

I can inform the member that it concerns 35,000 trained leaders in 5,000 associations as well as 432 facility projects. Specially adapted sports equipment for persons with disabilities has been purchased. I can also mention collaborative projects in connection with the introduction of the leisure card. I have now highlighted some of the things that the government is doing. Through these investments, for example, we utilize the structures that Christofer Bergenblock and Centerpartiet claim already exist.

It is completely correct that we should utilize the channels that exist and take advantage of the good forces that already exist in Association Sweden, but in addition to this, we must be able to do something else.

The leisure card is a supplement that will hopefully make the greatest difference for those who need it the most. From the government's side, we argue that we will need to think differently. What we already do is not enough, even though there are fantastically many good people, associations, and organizations out there doing a good job. We need to do both. We need to utilize what exists and at the same time dare to think anew. After that, we need to adjust and evaluate.

The most important thing is that every child out there, and every young adult, feels welcome to association life and to Föreningssverige. It is actually this that is the heart of our country.

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Madam Speaker! Every day, the sports movement, the youth movement, the cultural schools, organized outdoor life, and many others make enormous efforts so that children and young people have a leisure activity to look forward to. The competition with the screens' seductive algorithms is a challenge, but there are also other obstacles. For some children and young people who are not involved in the association life today, it is other factors, for example economics or knowledge of which activities exist, that are the obstacle.

We know that school is an incredibly important protective factor for children and young people. Those who experience that school works and manage in school run a lower risk of being affected by the problems that one as a young person may need to grapple with. Leisure time and social contexts also play a role for young people's well-being and sense of coherence.

We have long spoken about the importance of breaking social exclusion and giving every child the opportunity to succeed. But now we are doing more than just talking, both in the school area and to strengthen young people's opportunities for leisure activities to look forward to.

Fritidskortet is one of the largest investments in children's and young people's leisure time in a very long time. It concerns approximately 800 million kronor per year. As a comparison, just over 500 million is invested annually in Idrottslyftet. We make this investment because we know that a meaningful leisure time where children get to participate in sports, culture, outdoor life, and association life builds strong individuals, and strong individuals build strong societies together. It prevents both mental ill-health and physical inactivity. It strengthens self-esteem and participation, and it reduces the risk that young people seek out destructive environments.

But leisure time should not be a privilege for some. The thresholds need to be lowered so that more people can participate. According to a report from the Agency for Youth and Civil Society, MUCF, young people with disabilities are less satisfied with their leisure time compared to peers without disabilities. They are also less likely to participate in cultural activities, which can negatively affect their social and emotional well-being. The report shows that barriers to participation include economic limitations, lack of accessibility, and a feeling of not being welcome.

That is why we have from the beginning built in a focus on accessibility and inclusion in the leisure card. Already in the preparatory work, money was invested to increase the opportunities for children with disabilities to participate. We have provided support to the Swedish Sports Confederation so that they can create more and better sports environments, and Fritidsbanken has received resources to provide leisure aids and para-sports equipment.

Riksidrottsförbundet and Svenskt Friluftsliv have received funds to carry out measures to strengthen, make accessible, and increase awareness of activities for children and young people in municipalities across the country with a large proportion of children in economically weak households. They have also received support to recruit and train leaders and to increase the opportunities for children and young people with disabilities to find and participate in leisure activities.

In addition, the Cultural Council has received funds and a mandate to prepare and strengthen the capacity of the municipal cultural school, and MUCF has received funds to distribute to children's and youth organizations.

The idea is that children and young people, through the breadth of activities they can use the leisure card for, should also be able to discover new interests.

Unlike previous investments in children and young people, the leisure card is something that is earmarked for all children between 8 and 16 years old, with a clear reinforcement for those who need it most. All children between 8 and 16 years old receive 500 kronor, while children in economic hardship receive 2,000 kronor. This is a reform that can reduce inequalities.

Madam Speaker! I am somewhat surprised that the opposition is so strongly against this reform because it concerns a genuine attempt to reduce inequalities. There are 120,000 children and young people living in economic vulnerability, and we are now removing one of the obstacles for them to participate. For the eleven-year-old who hears their parents worrying about whether there will be enough money for food, the threshold is insurmountable to express a wish to dance at the cultural school, participate in the scouts, or play football. The eleven-year-old now receives targeted support precisely so that he or she will have the opportunity to participate.

Madam Speaker! The leisure card is a new tool that we want to test to create exactly what we Liberals fight for, namely a society where every person, regardless of background or circumstances, is given the opportunity to participate, grow, and influence their own life. We are now removing the barriers to participation and giving all children and young people the opportunity for a leisure activity to look forward to.

I vote in favor of the committee's proposal.

(Applause)

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! I thank Member Malin Danielsson for the presentation.

Leisure time should not be a privilege for some, says the member, and so it obviously is. We must ensure that all children and young people in Sweden are given the opportunity for an active leisure life, regardless of whether they live in central Stockholm, in a socioeconomically disadvantaged area, in the countryside or in remote areas, and regardless of what personal characteristics they have.

The member highlights young people with disabilities, and I know that the Liberals as a party have historically been engaged in the situation of people with disabilities and that the member themselves has a strong commitment to these issues. The member also says that in the leisure card, a focus on accessibility and inclusion linked to specifically people with disabilities has been built in. But the examples the member brings up are not about the leisure card but about other initiatives to build up environments and structures for the purpose of increasing accessibility for people with disabilities.

The leisure card has actually been criticized by disability organizations because it does not specifically help people with disabilities, as they will not receive the higher amount despite often being economically vulnerable. They also have difficulty accessing facilities and activities, and the money will not be of any help if these individuals cannot participate in the activities.

In what way does the leisure card specifically strengthen the possibility for children and young people with disabilities to participate in activities?

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Madam Speaker! I thank Member Bergenblock for the question. I love that we are talking about how people with disabilities should be given access to physical and cultural activities, for this we have talked far too little about over the years.

I believe that the preparatory work and the investments being made in para-sports, more leisure aids, increased information about activity offerings and increased accessibility to facilities for culture and sports, and so on, increase the discussion about also making more activities accessible for children and young people with disabilities. The educational initiatives being undertaken are also about broadening perspectives and providing a more inclusive sport and culture where one has the ability to meet people regardless of whether they have an NPF diagnosis or a physical movement disability, for example, not seeing or not hearing. Society needs to become much more inclusive.

The leisure card ensures that we get this issue on the agenda to a greater extent than before. We are making demands that everyone should be included when the leisure card is introduced. We are to have open clubs and cultural schools and an open outdoor life where everyone can participate. It is a prerequisite for it to work.

The economic vulnerability that children and young people with disabilities often live in is also affected by this. Among the 120,000 children and young people who will receive the increased support, there are indeed quite a few with disabilities.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! The Member of Parliament says that the leisure card sets requirements that everyone shall be included. Does that mean that an association can only be approved if activities for people with disabilities are also conducted there? We know that many of Sweden's sports facilities are not adapted, so will these associations be excluded from the leisure card? It does not say so in the bill, but perhaps that is the case.

Or is it more about empty talk and that the leisure card does not take into account the situation of people with disabilities at all, and that the disability movement, which criticizes the leisure card, is therefore correct in its criticism?

The Leader of the Opposition speaks about the fact that there are people with disabilities in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas. Yes, of course that is so. But the disability rights movement is requesting, in addition to direct investments in renovated facilities and accessibility, a higher amount generally for children and young people with disabilities. In that regard, the government has not responded, but instead has said that it is for the socioeconomically disadvantaged areas.

The issue of additional cost compensation has also been raised. As a person with a disability, one has the opportunity to receive additional cost compensation, for example, for extra costs for leisure activities. The question is whether this will be deducted from the leisure card. The proposition states that this will be the case.

One will therefore not be able to receive additional cost compensation for things that the authorities consider the leisure card covers. That is entirely reasonable. But the result is that one might not receive any money as a person with a disability. Furthermore, a fear of clawbacks is highlighted, something that has already affected many people with disabilities previously.

Why does the government not invest more clearly in people with disabilities, especially when the Liberals are in government?

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

Malin Danielsson (L)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Bergenblock, for the commitment to these issues! I really appreciate it.

Is it a condition, and is it a requirement? No, but that is not how our grant provision to the sports movement or the Kulturskolan looks at the current moment either. On the other hand, it is a carrot. It is a way to welcome more people into the sports movement, into cultural activities, and into Swedish outdoor life that we need to take advantage of.

I really appreciate that we now have the discussion about that also should include persons with disabilities. Very often we only work with special solutions instead of the broad strokes and welcoming more in into the regular operations.

There is an incredible amount that we need to do to achieve higher participation for people in society today and in leisure activities, and this applies in particular to children and young people with disabilities. We work together on those issues in various contexts.

It is about providing the opportunity to take transport services to one's activity, which several municipalities are withdrawing. It is about being able to get accompaniment, so that someone like Nicolina Pernheim Goodrich can continue to compete at a high level. It is about the additional cost compensation, which the member also raised.

There are many more things we need to do than just introducing the leisure card. That is not what solves everything for this group. But when we make such an investment, we shall also include children and young people with disabilities.

We have put particular pressure on that, not least in information activities ahead of the introduction, both towards those who organize all these leisure activities and towards children and young people with disabilities: Here you are welcome to come in and have a leisure activity to look forward to.

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

Nils Seye Larsen (MP)

Madam Speaker! I shall begin by moving to approve reservation 1.

I thought I would tell a little about my background and about how I grew up with two parents who both immigrated to Sweden. I grew up in a Swedish area. During the first years, I was subjected to a lot of bullying and did not have a single Swedish friend.

Now, my parents in their own right had a burning interest in music. That was perhaps what made me join the music school one day and decide that I wanted to start playing the violin.

I remember the first years when I struggled with the violin. We didn't have a cat running in the garden. I am impressed by my parents' patience when I proudly wanted to show off the first songs I had learned, such as Spain is a country where one dances tango. Violin is truly an instrument that can sound fantastic when one masters it and purely terrible when one does not.

It was only when I grew up and entered my teenage years that I got my first Swedish friends and discovered a burning interest in sports. I loved ice hockey and football and wanted so much to play, but by then it was too late. Then I suddenly could not join any association or any sports team. It didn't work then, instead, one had to start at a young age.

What I am trying to show with this history is precisely how our surroundings, the children we grow up with, parents and other things affect our interest and our will to engage ourselves in the sports movement or cultural life.

I thought I would tell you a little about Umeå, my home municipality. I think it is interesting. Umeå is one of the municipalities in Sweden that has chosen to invest enormously in culture and leisure. It is one of the municipalities that invests the most in it. It is seen as part of the social sustainability. It is an important and strongly rooted part of Umeå's history with a strong civil society.

It exists precisely because we have decided that every child – regardless of background, regardless of residential area and regardless of parents – should be able to participate in and have the right to a meaningful leisure time. There, children can be involved in voluntary association life, meet adult role models, be active and move, or discover the treasures of culture.

The activity is broad and extensive. There is outreach activity that is also adapted to be able to reach more target groups. It is also a part of the social construction with a strong municipal school and urban planning that works for mixed housing forms in order to specifically counteract segregation.

Throughout all this social construction, culture and leisure play an important role. It is how we can ensure that our children and young people, much more naturally, regardless of background, residential environment or parents, become a part of leisure and culture.

I would like to highlight here the importance of work with culture and leisure throughout life and the importance of involving both our parents as well as the very youngest children.

The culture sector plays a crucial role. But it is not the case that we have not met any resistance when we in Umeå, just as in many other municipalities – for example Skellefteå, Luleå, Östersund or others – have chosen to invest in culture.

On the contrary, the Sweden Democrats and also the Moderates have repeatedly been those who want to cut back, above all on culture. We sometimes hear mocking phrasing such as: We shall not tax-subsidize entertainment for the elite, and other nonsense.

We also see the ongoing cultural slaughter nationally. For example, one does not understand the important role of the study associations in lifelong learning. What worries me is that somewhere in the whole, we are somewhat dismantling what were Sweden's strengths: the popular movements, civil society, the study associations, and lifelong learning. Those things are important in order to get more children and young people to engage and activate themselves.

I understand that the intention behind the leisure card is good. There is a good intention. But we must also look at the whole. That is where we mean that it hits the wrong target.

We obviously need to work more actively so that more children are active in their leisure time, in the sports movement. That is perhaps the positive aspect of the intention. More physical activity is needed, more culture is needed, and more children need to be able to take part in it.

But the leisure card, even if one means well with it, has major flaws. This has also been highlighted by several speakers, and my party colleague will also highlight it after me. That is in addition to the fact that it leads to a large administration.

Unfortunately, it does not tackle the larger problems that cause us to fail in bringing all children from different strata of society, different groups, and different backgrounds into an active and meaningful leisure time and into the sports movement.

(Applause)

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Madam Speaker! What are you going to use your leisure card for? All around the country, this question will be asked by thousands of children and young people when the leisure card is introduced this autumn. It is a support for all children between 8 and 16 years old that can only be used for an active and meaningful leisure time in community with others. Those who have the greatest need will receive extra much.

The reason is simple: We need to ensure that more children and young people both stay in and find their way to a leisure activity, a sports club, a culture school, or another association in Swedish civic life, for example the scouts.

My target image for the leisure card is ready. It is from a visit where I saw the youth leader in an association standing in the doorway and greeting a little boy on his way in to gymnastics practice. The leader said: Hi! How fun that you are here! I haven't seen you for a while.

I know nothing about this little fellow's home conditions in this vulnerable area. But I know that this child, right then and there, was seen, heard that it was longed for, and was welcomed into its community, into a belonging that offers something completely different than the gangs. It is so much more than an active leisure time. It is community. It is identity. And we know that a good upbringing often begins in an association somewhere in Sweden – in sports, in scouts, in choir activities – with present adults and leaders who are prepared to give a piece of their hearts to guide, encourage, and nurture, and to be the role models that we so desperately need.

Madam Speaker! There are many societal challenges that we are grappling with. Children move less under the weight of the screens. Coordination deteriorates. Fitness deteriorates. Muscles and joints do not develop as they should – they almost wither away in young years. Diseases such as age-related diabetes and fatty liver are creeping down in age, and the link between reduced physical activity and mental ill-health is now well-established. That is why it is so urgent that as many as possible are in contexts of activity and movement.

At the same time, we have a situation where many children and young people quit at the age of ten or eleven when they realize that football, handball, or the cultural school makes it harder for mom and dad to pay for the grocery bag or the electricity bill. Then they say at home: It has become boring at practice. I want to quit. But in reality, the children are carrying the economic burden. No child should have to have it that way. But many do, and the pressure has increased as costs for, for example, participation in sports have risen. The Swedish Sports Confederation has recently noted this in two reports.

But the cost is not the whole problem! the critics shout. We have heard them here today. Why don't we just provide funds to the organizations, as we have done until now?

We do that as well. The Government has continued to provide support to the sports movement at over 2 billion and additionally invested extra funds on sports in vulnerable areas.

We have invested extra in outdoor life, and we have, as the first government ever, provided support to movement-promoting organizations that lie outside the regular support for sports and outdoor life. We have, as the first government, provided support to Fritidsbanken so that they have been able to create a broad and needs-adapted range of leisure aids and para-sports equipment.

The Government has invested over 300 million kronor in preparatory initiatives ahead of the introduction of the leisure card to strengthen, make accessible, and increase awareness of activities for children in municipalities across the country with a large proportion of children in economically weak households.

We have invested funds to recruit and train more leaders and increase the opportunities for children and young people with disabilities to participate in leisure activities, for example through increased opportunities for clubs to purchase para-sports equipment and assistive devices.

We have made a historic extra investment of 130 million kronor to equip, renovate, expand and rebuild facilities and sports environments in preparation for the leisure card.

We have provided the Arts Council with funds for preparatory measures in the arts school and MUCF with funds to distribute to children's and youth organizations to increase their opportunities to participate. There are also several cultural associations or organizations with cultural activities there, to answer a previous question.

With the challenges we have as a country, we do not think it is an option to just continue as we have done before – to just keep going in the old ruts and hope that it solves itself. We have far too many children who quit sports and association life and too many groups of children who never start, and we do not reach them with the methods and the support that we have used until now.

"But it will be cumbersome to use!" the critics shout. "It isn't even a physical card," say others.

I believe that the vast majority today understand that one can simply log in and that one no longer needs to have a physical card in hand. And we are doing a lot of things to simplify this so that it is not complicated.

We direct our initiative straight to the child and the family so that it reaches more people and becomes a clear relief for the private finances of children in economic hardship. It is therefore that we differentiate the support with 500 kronor per year to everyone between the year they turn 8 and the year they turn 16, but 2,000 kronor to those who are in economic hardship, approximately 120,000 children.

It is clear that there will be some costs, not least initially, in the form of both initial development costs and ongoing management costs to deliver these measures. In the design of the leisure card, several important principles have been guiding, and of course, it has affected the costs initially that the leisure card should be easy to use, user-friendly. Resources have then been needed to develop a digital service for the leisure card that, to the greatest extent possible, involves automated procedures, which will push down the management costs in the long run.

What does this mean then? For the first thing, no receipt tracking, no complicated applications and no out-of-pocket expenses for the households that need this support most, because we know that too much of that – providing receipts, making complicated applications and laying out funds – means that resource-poor households do not utilize the support. Therefore, we want to build it in that way.

Secondly, we want effective control measures to counteract incorrect payments and economic crime. A larger proportion of the funds allocated has therefore initially been needed for authorities to create an effective and legally secure system in light of the knowledge we unfortunately have regarding the criminals' ingenuity in acquiring public funds. Money that is intended for children and young people's leisure time should go there and not end up in criminals' pockets.

I dare to assert that the leisure card is one of the most carefully scrutinized reforms. For example, the activities included will be collected in an execution register. In order to be part of the system, an association must have existed for five years. This means that it is not possible to create an association solely for the purpose of obtaining funds from the leisure card. All associations need to have previously been approved recipients of state support and have already undergone inspection. It is also very important that the activity is continuous, not temporary, and that it is leader-led so that we can achieve this of weaving a strong social fabric around our children. It is an important principle when it comes to the leisure card's setup. It can also only go to associations in Swedish association life and in the culture school.

The alternative we have heard here today is to just continue as we have always done and not do anything new – to lean back and say: We have never done it this way, and therefore we shall not do it now either.

With that attitude, I am afraid we will not succeed. Then there is a risk that we will never get over that almost eternal eleven-year hump where sports lose members. Then there is a risk that we will not reach those who have never experienced outdoor life and that more will not get to discover the joy of learning to play football or bassoon.

Madam Speaker! Is it easy to create something new in Sweden? No, it certainly is not. But that does not mean it is not needed. Will everything be perfect from the start? No, it will not be. But this is so good. And it is such a good day, because we are creating a new opportunity for more to find their way to sports, music, outdoor life, and association life and stay there.

We need more people who can hear: Hello! How nice to see you! You can use your leisure card here.

We need to give more children and young people opportunities for movement, community, and joy, and the leisure card contributes to creating such opportunities.

(Applause)

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

Azadeh Rojhan (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the speech. I do not doubt the Minister's commitment to getting more children and young people moving. It is precisely this reform that we have very many questions about.

In our neighboring country Norway, this reform has already been tried. There is a leisure card system in Norway. The conclusion that can be drawn from this is that the reform has not succeeded in reaching the groups that it was hoped to reach. Children and young people in exclusion and vulnerable children and young people have not been reached by the reform that has been implemented in Norway.

There are many things that affect children's and young people's opportunities to participate in leisure activities and in the sports movement. One such obstacle is not so much the membership fee as all the incidental costs that sports involve, such as equipment, transportation, and competition fees. The leisure card does not cover those costs.

If one truly wants to make things easier for families with children, there are other and better ways to go – increase the housing allowance, increase the child allowance, push to bring down food costs, and stop lowering taxes for the very richest and instead use that money to create more jobs, strengthen the welfare, and build a stronger society. It will benefit the household economy, and in the end, it will also benefit the children.

With the proposal that is now being put forward, it is only the membership fee that is addressed. My question to the Minister is: Is that really enough to get more children and young people moving?

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Madam Speaker! I thank the member for the question.

I am familiar with the system in Norway. It was a municipal system that existed in a number of municipalities. It was not digital but was based on the fact that one had to apply, run around with receipts and advance the funds. That was the reason why it did not perform as well as one might wish.

There was also no differentiation in the system. There was as much support for the one who was well-off as for the one who was in economic hardship.

That is why we are building the system in a completely different way. We look at what works and what does not work. We look at how one should design such a system so that it is accurate.

Is it enough to turn the trends regarding children's and young people's movement? No, it is not enough. But it is necessary. It is necessary so that more people get the chance, so that we get a positive situation for all who see that the money is not enough, that they cannot participate because they cannot pay the training fee, the membership fee, or the rent for equipment. This we now enable with the leisure card.

Will we need to make further efforts? I am completely convinced of that. We are already investing particularly in sports in vulnerable areas. It is very important to build a stronger community life. We will also need further efforts to, for example, reduce children's screen time and create more opportunities for active transport so that children and young people move more.

The health status for children and young people today is concerning. We need to do much more.

The leisure card means a very significantly increased opportunity for children in economic hardship to participate, to have the costs of participating and practicing sports fully or partially covered. Why say no to this?

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

Azadeh Rojhan (S)

Madam Speaker! I want to touch upon an issue that I did not quite raise in my speech, namely the administrative burden for associations.

As the leisure card is currently designed, it places an increased administrative burden on associations. This can lead to associations that are run entirely voluntarily with limited resources choosing instead to opt out of the system. Furthermore, the costs for the associations risk increasing if they, for example, are forced to handle invoices in a completely new way.

Increased costs for the associations risk, in turn, leading to the children who have the greatest need of the leisure card being excluded when the associations are instead forced to raise the fees.

When one says that one wants to do much more and at the same time has this reality to contend with, that the associations may need to raise their fees, I still wonder how the reform will be funded in the long run. The reform can therefore become more and more costly if one has to meet the cost increase on the associations' side.

And where shall the money come from? How can the Minister and the Government afford to finance this reform in the long run and at the same time not reduce the investments in sports? I do not think we are getting a clear answer to that question. This is a very costly reform, and nowhere is it explained how it will be funded in the long run and where the money will come from if the investment is only to grow.

The government wants to, at the same time, as the minister himself just said, do much more. Where will the money come from? Does the sports movement need to be worried that the general investments will be scaled back in favor of the leisure card?

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Madam Speaker! No, the sports movement does not need to be worried that we will reduce the general support. We have not done that, and we will not do so.

The members of the board ask how it is to be paid. We prioritize this. We prioritize the 800 million kronor that go to this because we see how urgent it is that we include more. So far, I have not heard anything in the debate that is anything more than more of the same, more of what we have always done and which has led us here – with the eleven-year hump in the sports movement and with groups that stand outside and cannot be included.

We know that the economy plays a role. We know that children begin to take responsibility for the family's household finances at the age of ten or eleven when they understand that mom or dad might actually not be able to afford this membership fee or training fee. It is this that we want to do something about.

We are investing 800 million kronor in one of the largest initiatives ever made to get more people into Swedish association life. Member Rojhan calls this a symbolic gesture. That 120,000 children in Sweden receive 2,000 kronor that they can use to join an association, to participate in training, to play an instrument, or whatever it may be, would therefore be a symbolic gesture. One is astonished.

A symbol is something that has no actual value. This has an actual and direct value that will make a difference for many.

We will work very hard to make it as simple as possible for everyone to use the card. It must also be simple for the associations. It is something we work on every day.

(Applause)

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

Vasiliki Tsouplaki (V)

Madam Speaker! We did have a short exchange of remarks here earlier, but we did not quite manage to cover all the issues. I therefore return now to the Minister with the reflections I have regarding these bottlenecks, which I am concerned about. It is one of our major objections from Vänsterpartiet: We are concerned that new children will not enter the system, so to speak, due to the existence of bottlenecks.

Part of this is the long queues to the culture school – we can stick to the culture here in the first instance. Three out of four municipalities have a queue for the culture school. There is a lack of educators, there is a lack of premises, and there is a lack of resources in the municipalities. I would like to see the government provide increased general state grants to the municipalities so that they can secure their cultural activities. When the municipalities are tight on funds, it is what is legally mandated that is protected, while culture and leisure activities, which are not legally mandated, are left to suffer. It would be interesting to hear if there are any such plans in the government.

The second thing I am considering is the expansion of Kulturskoleklivet. As I mentioned in my speech, the Tidö parties were involved in stopping the expansion of Kulturskoleklivet, which would have generated more cultural school educators who could shorten the queues and take on more children who want to learn to play an instrument, dance, sing, and so on. Are there plans by the government to expand Kulturskoleklivet or in other ways ensure that there will be more educators who can shorten the queues?

I often meet with cultural organizations. Most recently it was the National Federation of Amateur Theatre, and they wondered why a cultural association like ATR, which engages many children across the country in theatre, cannot be included in the system. Does the Minister want to see an expansion in the long term so that even children interested in culture can be reached by this reform?

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

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

It becomes a bit of a general answer: There are many things that could work better in Sweden so that we can expand various operations and ensure that they become better adapted for different people, as well as when it comes to ensuring competence supply and such things.

The leisure card is not the answer to all those questions; rather, different measures are needed for the culture school to function better, for example for persons with disabilities. The municipalities can work on this, but I also want to point out the funds that we have given to the Arts Council and the culture schools so that they can improve their operations and, not least, inform about the activities among people who normally do not seek them out. It is also about being able to purchase instruments and prepare for the leisure card. The leisure card has therefore already meant that one has been able to develop its operations.

When it comes to other associations, I note that the cultural schools have a broad range of activities today. It is not just instruments, but a breadth of activities in different locations. In addition, there are a number of associations that are either pure cultural associations or that have a quite rich cultural offering, and they will be able to apply to be included.

We have already said from the beginning that we are not closing the door to expanding this in the long run. We have chosen to limit it somewhat at the start to get it in place, but we have said that we will follow the development and thus see that more cultural associations could be included in this. We could expand the system in different ways. I am really not unfamiliar with that but would like to see that we can continue to develop this so that different types and even more associations can be included.

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

Vasiliki Tsouplaki (V)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer! I understand that it is the Minister for Culture and not Jakob Forssmed who is ultimately responsible for some of the questions I am asking, so I wish for Jakob Forssmed to take the question about more educators to the cultural schools to Parisa Liljestrand. A state intervention would truly be needed to guarantee both continuing education for existing staff and that more educators can be on site. The temporary funds that have existed now have helped a little in the parts that the Minister describes, but to achieve long-term stability and shorten the queues, larger efforts from the government's side are needed to support the municipalities in this.

My second question concerns an area that is closer to the Minister, namely the construction issue. I pointed out in my speech that there has been a broad consensus here in the Riksdag about establishing some type of fund or a support similar to that which exists in Denmark for municipalities and associations that want to build. Now I perceive that the government has sort of made a half-measure of this which has ended up at the Centre for Sports Research, where one receives a knowledge assignment but not the advisory and supporting assignment to get more facilities in place. The support that exists at the Swedish Sports Confederation applies to associations. It is very good and reaches out in a good way and could also be expanded. But many municipalities may not have built facilities in decades and face great challenges in making room for more children, and they would need support in thinking anew and doing exciting things. When the Culture Committee visited Denmark, we could see what very cool facilities one gets with expertise from architects and advisors.

I would like to hear how the Minister views the development of something similar to the Danish LOA. That is, some resources have been given to this center, but there is a report from the Centre for Sports Research stating that they want to do more. How does the Minister view that?

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you again for a good discussion, Vasiliki Tsouplaki! I appreciate that we can have this discussion. Even if one does not agree with us that the leisure card is the best solution but sees some concerns, I appreciate that one also sees the possibility for development and how more can be done.

I think that is positive, and I appreciate it very much. Please still help and spread the word about the opportunities, because now this is coming! I hope that many want to be involved and ensure that as many as possible can take part in this.

Regarding the facility issue, I have personally been to Denmark and studied their fund. I think they work in a very exciting way to not only build for the existing but also to think about how one can develop the site and ensure that different activities can benefit from a certain sports environment. How can one broaden it so that sports and culture co-create in different ways? I would like to see us consider what the state can do further.

The Board points to our assignment to the Centre for Sports Research. We have also recently given an assignment to Boverket to, among other things, support municipalities that are in the process of investing further regarding how to build in a good and efficient way.

I am open to discussing further measures in this matter. It is completely obvious that we need more facilities. We need to build smarter and better and not reinvent the wheel in every municipality, but also see it as the member points out.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister for Social Affairs Jakob Forssmed, for an engaged speech!

All children have the right to an active and meaningful leisure time, which I think is very well reflected in the Minister's speech. I fully share the Minister's commitment when it comes to enabling an active leisure time for more children and young people.

However, Madam Speaker, I do not share the Minister's commitment specifically regarding the solution to establish a state leisure card. The Center Party's criticism of this card is actually not against the card itself or against our ability to lower membership fees, but it is about the bureaucracy and administration that this builds up – for all the good intention that we must try something new, but in practice it means that we are spending money on bureaucracy and administration which, after all, could have gone directly to civil society and association life in the form of lowered membership fees, lowered training fees, better facilities, and further investments in para-sports and the leisure bank which have been mentioned here earlier.

We are, therefore, talking about a cost of approximately 300 million kronor just for the digital system that has been built up to facilitate the implementation of this. The administrative cost has been estimated at around 250 million kronor per year. Now the minister says it is somewhat lower than that; well, even if it is only 100–150 million per year, it is money that could have gone directly to civil society instead of to administration.

My question is: Why does the government want to spend all this money on state administration and bureaucracy instead of spending it directly on the children and the young?

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Madam Speaker! I do not want to spend a single krona on bureaucracy or on the state hiring people at Försäkringskassan if it is not necessary to achieve the purpose of this. It is about creating a dedicated support that can only be used for an active and meaningful leisure time.

I am sure the member is aware that all state support comes with costs for handling, administration, and what the member calls bureaucracy. That is how it is when we are to have support: there needs to be a certain level of control so that tax money is not paid out incorrectly. We need to ensure that this is directed correctly. In this case, it is also about a differentiation so that people with the greatest needs receive the greatest support. If one has no such ambition, it is easy to simply dismiss this support and say that we should do as we always have done, but in that case, we have not succeeded with our intention to include everyone. That is simply the answer.

Now I have been able to demonstrate that we are pushing down the administrative costs significantly in relation to what was reported from, among others, Försäkringskassan in March 2024. The question to Christofer Bergenblock is whether the Centerpartiet, now that we are reducing the administrative costs so significantly, is prepared to stand behind this reform. I know the Centerpartiet as a party that safeguards the leisure time of children and young people and that is happy to work so that more people can take part in outdoor life, sports, and such things.

Therefore, it would be fantastic if we could welcome the Center Party into the family that advocates for the leisure card and works so that more children and young people can be included in Swedish association life. Perhaps we can agree on this already today.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Madam Speaker! If the administration and the bureaucracy had been reduced to zero, we might have been able to agree. But the difference in perspective between me and the Minister, and perhaps between me and the Christian Democrats if we are talking about party affiliation, is well the view of and the trust in civil society. The sitting government has withdrawn 500 million kronor from study associations. Those were funds that went directly to seniors' activities, activities for people with disabilities, and cultural activities in the countryside. The 500 million kronor are removed entirely for a period of three years. That says something about the trust in civil society.

I believe that the leisure card also says something about the trust in civil society. We have a functioning system today where the overarching organizations, such as Riksidrottsförbundet, distribute money to the member organizations.

Now a new system is to be built up alongside, a bureaucratic, administrative model that will cost money. It may cost somewhat less than what was said a few months ago, but it will nevertheless cost hundreds of millions of kronor in the coming years.

Furthermore, it costs money for the associations that want to run their activities. The enthusiasts who want to hold the training, sit on the board and run the kiosk will now have to spend a lot of time on administration and bureaucracy instead.

This is fundamentally a good approach. But sometimes one must lift one's gaze and look at whether it is the best way to use the money. We have heard previously that 250 of these millions, which otherwise would have gone to the leisure card specifically, have been used to support facilities and leadership initiatives via Riksidrottsförbundet. There, the money did good directly. Why could not all this money that the leisure card will cost go directly to the association life?

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Madam Speaker! Then we would have done it in the same way as we always have. Then we would not have had the opportunity to differentiate the support and give four times as much to those who are in financial hardship, to those who know that the membership fee competes with the family's household economy and therefore say that it has become boring at practice and quit. Then we would not have reached them in the way that we can now do with the leisure card.

Christofer Bergenblock says that the administrative costs must come down to zero for the system to be worth implementing. I make a completely different assessment. I believe that this will turn out to be very important for very many, not least people who find themselves in an economic exclusion that actually prevents them from participating in Swedish association life.

Association life is something that both I and Christofer Bergenblock – I am sure of it – love. There, the community flourishes, there we meet each other, not with hatred but with love and respect, and there the Swedish and international good values, which so many of us safeguard, grow.

It is the actions we take toward one another in civil society that build the foundation for Swedish trust and Swedish democracy. Therefore, it is incredibly important that we safeguard civil society. That is what we intend to try to do in this reform as well, by making it simple to participate and simple to administer the leisure card.

I know that many associations long to welcome more children who today do not have the opportunity but who will be able to get it with the leisure card.

(Applause)

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

Gustaf Lantz (S)

Madam Speaker! The best election poster ever made is SSU's from 1948 with the picture of a boy standing by his bicycle and glancing away towards some students who are mocking each other. The message reads: "gifted but poor, give him an equal chance". It summarizes the social democratic ideology in a fantastic way. Economic barriers that exclude people from reaching their full potential are unjust to those who are left behind and simultaneously prevent a society from moving forward.

Reaching one's full potential through association life does not necessarily have to be about selling out Ullevi a few times every year, like Håkan Hellström, or winning three Olympic golds, like Sarah Sjöström. The greatest merit of Swedish association life is that children and young people get to meet leaders who care and that they gain a sense of belonging and self-confidence. It is about celebrating goals in a crowd and singing in harmony.

Madam Speaker! I was raised by mom, dad, Roffe, Arne and Christer. When the Vindhemspojkarna born in 1981 are now middle-aged, it begins to sink in what efforts our coaches made for us. Tired after work, they went straight to training. Vacation weeks they spent at tournaments. And they didn't do it for money, but for us.

Every time a child is shut out from association life because the parents cannot afford it, it is a great loss – for the child but also for society. Right now, it is becoming increasingly common that children cannot participate or, rather said, are not allowed to participate.

It didn't have to be this way. When the government has sat still and watched as food prices have soared and unemployment has spiked, the gaps have widened in Sweden. The government is so eager to lower the tax for those with the highest incomes that they even borrow money for it. But at the same time, they say no to increased child allowances. They make it more expensive to buy medicines but cheaper to renovate kitchens. Instead of trying to hold the country together, they drive a policy that widens the class divides. For this, the children pay the highest price.

Madam Speaker! Against that background, it is both unexpected and positive that the government still wants to take the initiative to increase the opportunities for children to participate in association life. But unfortunately, the goal is missed. Enormous amounts of money are wasted on administration. It is like when my daughter was going to a party this weekend and we bought a gift on the way. We found a perfect pink swim ring at a special price. Unfortunately, the store did not have any wrapping paper. We therefore had to buy a gift box, which turned out to be almost as expensive as the gift. It was annoying and felt irresponsible, even though it was my money.

But all those hundreds of millions that the government distributes, when it comes to the investment in the leisure card, are not theirs. They are the result of hardworking Swedes paying taxes. Better management is required then. Instead, the money could have been invested directly in the association life, which could have kept the fees down themselves and worked specifically towards children whose parents lack the money to pay the fee. Then the administration would have been minimal, Madam Speaker.

It would have been even better if, in addition, we could have invested even more in association life, which we Social Democrats propose. We must, in fact, have more meeting places between people from different backgrounds. We must see more bonds of friendship between people. We must recruit to the good forces of society. Association life does that in an outstanding way.

Madam Speaker! I remember when I sat as a youth representative on the board of Vindhemspojkarna and understood that the association always charged an extra hundred or so on the registration fee to ensure that everyone could go to Gothia Cup. That is because one knew exactly which children otherwise would not have been able to join. Everything happened very discreetly, and everything was very self-evident. In Vindhemspojkarna, we were members, not customers. We talked more about the value than about the price.

There is a lot of heart and solidarity in the Swedish sports movement, and we must cherish that social force. We need it when we have a government that does not miss a single opportunity to send signals that certain groups do not belong in our country.

Madam Speaker! The leaders know their people. They know what the obstacles look like and how to overcome them. Give the mandate that all children shall be included, and the clubs will handle it.

But instead, it is always played as a business, with checks and lists, with complications and bickering. A local sports club would never have come up with anything so complicated and inefficient. They know how to take responsibility for money and members.

Listen to the sports movement instead of clinging to the napkin sketch from Tidö Castle! Give Idrottssverige what it wants and children what they need!

With that, I move for approval of reservation 1.

(Applause)

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Madam Speaker! Playing business, says Member Lantz. To have a subsidy that is directly targeted at people in financial need and that can only be used in Swedish civic life is apparently playing business. Tone down the rhetoric!

We may have different views on this reform, but what we want to do is something we do not do today, namely to reach those who are not included. I think Gustaf Lantz pointed out many good things in his speech, such as associations that take responsibility for people who do not have the financial means. It is absolutely excellent that it is in that way – that one takes in a little extra so that some who do not have the financial means can be included. That is also what we are trying to do here: distribute according to need to people who today do not have the opportunity.

When we launched the leisure card, the Social Democrats called it welfare for the poor, I remember. That people who do not have financial means should be able to participate is therefore welfare for the poor, according to the Social Democrats. Then my question to Member Lantz is: When an association does what Member Lantz pointed out, is that also welfare for the poor? We help each other so that those who do not have the same opportunities as Member Lantz and I and our children can also be included.

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

Gustaf Lantz (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister very much for the question.

I must say that the enthusiasm for the leisure card that the Minister exhibits is infectious. It is wonderful to have a minister who truly wants to achieve something. This is the big day, as he himself has said. It is something important that we are talking about. In my speech, I tried to convey how important it is that young people can be involved. The Minister has a fantastic approach. Therefore, I feel that it becomes even more important that this gets right. But I think it is a pity that the money that the Minister has nevertheless managed to secure in his government, which has not been known for investing specifically in them with small incomes but on the contrary, is now largely disappearing into unnecessary bureaucracy.

This bureaucracy could have been bypassed in a very easy way by ensuring that there are resources for the associations to both motivate young people and keep the fees down. Now, instead, we have a system with vouchers. It should be played as a business, as I said – it should be clear that it is the individual who is to receive this support directly. We have seen this within the school system with the school voucher, and it has been sold in with the same incredible enthusiasm by other cabinet ministers. But we have seen that it does not turn out so well in the end.

I understand that as a minister, one wants to point out something very concrete that is visible and directed at individuals – it is a way to score political points. But this is too important to score political points on. One constructs large bureaucratic systems that money leaks from when it is actually about young people being able to practice sports and find their way into the sports movement. There are better ways – ask the sports movement itself!

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Madam Speaker! I fundamentally welcome this debate, and I welcome Gustav Lantz's great commitment so that more children and young people shall have the opportunity to participate in association life. I naturally engage in dialogue with the sports movement regarding what it needs to be able to do such a fantastic job as it already does in many respects.

Here we are trying to do something new. I still think it is striking how little new and how few proposals the Social Democrats and the opposition come up with when it comes to reaching those who do not already have the privilege of participating in sports. We have rolled out a special initiative on sports in vulnerable areas, Idrottsklivet, to strengthen the association life there. We link on the leisure card to provide greater opportunities to participate by having the training fee covered or partially covered. These are new things that we are doing because we see what we lack today: that more children get the chance.

We do this in this way to try to minimize the risks that the support will only go to those who are already included. A solution is required that is easy to use for those who are not used to making applications, running around with receipts, and fronting money. That is why we have chosen to invest in a robust system that enables the control to be there and that the money goes to what it is intended for. At the same time, we avoid some mistakes that have been made in other such systems.

We are, of course, receptive to further views from those who see flaws in the system. But we cannot continue to do as we have always done. I would like to hear a proposal for something that is new and that can truly address the issues that we point out from Member Lantz.

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

Gustaf Lantz (S)

Madam Speaker! Who is best at creating new innovative ways to get more young people to engage in the sports movement? It is the sports movement itself. Take Bandykul in Uppsala, for example! Many in Uppsala followed along in the bus to Studenternas IP and practiced bandy as kids. One would not have found their way there alone. The best we can do is to provide resources to sports clubs that are on their toes and have ideas, so that we can have Bandykul, Innebandykul, and whatever one may call it in more places.

But when we have a brutal class society, which is becoming deeper and more extensive, perhaps we should not always think up new fun things. I can offer a favorite in repeat that the government could take hold of, even if it is old: to raise the child allowance to decent levels for our time. We have, in terms of purchasing power, a lower child allowance now than we have had for an incredibly long time. With a higher child allowance, one might have the means to go and watch an elite football match and be inspired by it. Perhaps one has the means to pay the fee or to do something meaningful during the summer holidays.

It is also the case that the housing supplement has been lowered, which precisely hits those who have the hardest time having a meaningful leisure time. I think one must see the investments and what the government does as a whole and in a context. Here, a proposal is presented for a system where very much money disappears in unnecessary administration. At the same time, cuts are made for families with children, many of whom have difficulty keeping their heads above water. I hope for a change of government and new politics very soon.

(Applause)

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

Mats Berglund (MP)

Madam Speaker! We have debated the leisure card for quite a long time now. I am not quite last on the list, but perhaps the debate is winding down. I would still like to thank the Minister for choosing to be part of this debate, participate in the exchanges of remarks, answer questions, and also ask questions. We do have debate rules that have prevented me from being able to reply so far in this particular debate.

It is obvious that we have very different views on the idea of the leisure card and the design of the whole thing. We seem to agree that the purposes are good. It is about making it easier financially for the parents, to make it attractive and possible for more children and young people to participate in leisure activities and to broaden the recruitment. That is good.

But there is a long line of arguments against the model that the government has chosen to proceed with despite criticism from the referral bodies. It risks becoming very inefficient. The goal is missed. There are also significant risks with the setup. During the spring, this has been debated in various contexts.

I have chosen to write down arguments that have come up in the debate which show the problems with the leisure cards. It has become a rather long list, even though it is not complete. Furthermore, I think additional arguments have emerged in the debate here today. Now I have registered a speaking time of only six minutes, and I intended to stick to that. We shall see if that succeeds. But I will not have time to go through the entire list.

Mr. Speaker! The completely obvious major problem is still that such a large part of the costs runs away in an administrative superstructure to create registers and manage every association, every application, every child and its parents' financial situation. It is about several hundred million kronor that disappear in that way. A significantly more efficient way to use the sum – totaling almost 1 billion a year – would have been to strengthen the infrastructures surrounding the leisure activities.

Miljöpartiet has chosen to strengthen the cultural schools, the Swedish Sports Confederation, outdoor organizations, and so on with resources to do just this. We want a cultural school law to upgrade the cultural school teacher profession and ensure that in all municipalities there are good cultural schools that offer a breadth of courses also demanded by those who are not attracted by the course offerings that exist today. We want more rehearsal rooms and music houses. With the government's heavy cuts to study associations, 20,000, primarily young people, will lose their rehearsal room.

Miljöpartiet wants to see investments in sports and leisure leaders. We want to see specific investments in para-sports and on children and young people with intellectual disabilities. We want to create a facility fund – we have discussed this earlier today – based on the Danish model to get more sports facilities that suit and function for more people.

We also want to strengthen the infrastructure for outdoor life. We have not spoken so much about that today. The government is currently going in hard, I would like to say, to destroy important and valuable nature across the country. Forestry is getting increased opportunities and incentives for clear-cutting with the Forestry Investigation. The shore protection is currently not only being restricted with relaxations, as it is called, but completely disappearing from hundreds of thousands of watercourses. It is 1 million kilometers of narrow watercourses, perhaps one-tenth of Sweden's area, that are losing their protection now at the mid-year turn.

We want instead to renovate paths, forests, lakes, and beaches for recreation but also for the environment, nature, and biodiversity. All of this is just some of the things that we in Miljöpartiet prioritize in our proposal for the budget. The Tidö government instead spends several hundred million kronor on Ehälsomyndigheten and Försäkringskassan to build registers and manage applications.

Mr. Speaker! I move on in the list. There are many reasons for the government to back down, withdraw the bill, and find other ways to achieve the objectives of the leisure card.

In addition to the entire setup costing a lot of money, it will cause administrative hassle, not only for the authorities but also for parents and associations. Despite measures taken, the risk of economic crime and cheating probably remains. The goal of broadened recruitment will most likely not be reached, and instead, the means will go to children and young people who are already activated.

Arenagruppen has just now presented a report on the Järfälla model, which shows exactly this. Please read that report if you haven't already done so! Instead of the government's model, Arenagruppen has a number of proposals that aim to invest in existing structures within sports and the culture school. They want to strengthen the infrastructure and invest in leisure facilities, public transport, and aids for people with disabilities. They want to safeguard voluntary commitment: Do not turn community life into a market! These are precisely the proposals that we in Miljöpartiet have in our budget and in our motions.

Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, several referral bodies show how the proposed model benefits certain actors but disadvantages others. The support is tailored for sports and the culture school, but other activities within culture and outdoor life risk falling outside.

For example, STF has children and youth activities, but they are free. Here, it would instead have been long-awaited to have renovated paths, windbreaks and barbecue areas. But there, the government is cutting the support.

500 kronor or 2,000 kronor might be enough for some activities. That is good. But the person who today cannot afford, for example, horse riding, will not be helped even by 2,000 kronor. Sports have become expensive. Sure, a five-hundred can contribute on the margin, but the government should instead worry about the cost development.

The risk is more than imminent that many operations will use the money to stealthily increase fees. The associations have large costs, and instead of cutting elsewhere, they can now refer to the leisure card.

Furthermore, some have warned that the fees may need to be increased to cover the administrative costs for the associations that will be burdened with the complications regarding the leisure card. Here, the government must closely monitor the fee development from the very start.

That associations with all volunteers, mothers, fathers, and engaged individuals having access to information about which children come from homes with low incomes is also an obvious privacy risk. It involves a risk of stigmatization. Several have raised it.

Now I have exceeded my speaking time, Mr. Speaker. My enumeration could, of course, continue.

Overall, the ambitions are good, but the government's proposal is so poor that Miljöpartiet demands its rejection. We want to use the money for something else. I move for approval of Miljöpartiet's reservation 2.

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Mats Berglund's presentation certainly has its merits. It also has some flaws. One such flaw is that he merely lists a series of counterarguments and seems to mean that the number of arguments should be a kind of argument in itself. It is possible to argue against anything in that way. Suppose I am going to eat food. But it is difficult to go to the fridge and get the food. Yet I will still want to eat food. There is, therefore, a counterargument against this that is simply too weak for me to stop eating.

In the same way, it is with several of the arguments that Mats Berglund raises, for example the privacy argument. If one wants to make targeted investments for people who are in a vulnerable position, one does indeed need to identify who they are. The alternative is to say no to all targeted investments for people because this risks being stigmatizing in different ways. It is a weak argument, I think.

Furthermore, very few people find out about this. We provide leisure cards to everyone. No one in the school knows who has what amount on their leisure card. Everyone gets one, but the one who is in a vulnerable situation will have more money on their leisure card. This is a way to try to meet those types of issues. Furthermore, the associations often already know, as we could hear member Lantz testify, which children are the ones who have it tougher at home.

Then I think that Mats Berglund does one thing here that surprises me a bit. He says that there will be no broadened recruitment with the leisure card. He is certain of his position. That is really not me. I truly believe that this could be a tool to get more people involved in association life.

(Applause)

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

Mats Berglund (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the remark! Then I shall also join in debating this in a more enjoyable way.

I chose to structure the speech in this way: listing arguments and grouping arguments. It may not be the normal way I prepare a debate, but in this specific case, it was justified. That is, because there are incredibly many arguments against and actually few arguments for.

The idea behind this, we stand behind – absolutely. It is about broadened recruitment and about getting more young people into cultural life and outdoor life, not least, but of course also sports. The sports movement is working hard with this. I know that the government also has initiatives in other ways. But we could use these funds in a much more efficient way than having the setup with the leisure card.

I think that the list, the quantity, actually has a quality in itself. There are so many arguments, and they are not weak. There is a quality in every argument. Then, of course, one can discuss each one individually. The Minister raised the privacy argument. Not many will get access to these pieces of information. But have we really quality-assured this? What happens when this type of information actually leaks and spreads? We have seen in other contexts that it can be stigmatizing.

The Minister mentioned what I said about the fact that there probably will not be widened recruitment. Yes, to some extent, but it is a very small part of the money that will be used for that. Arenas' investigation of the Järfälla model, which I referred to, shows precisely that it failed.

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

Socialministern Jakob Forssmed (KD)

Mr. Speaker! It is good that the member is backing down a little now. To some extent, it can now move towards broadened recruitment. I believe that too. I believe that it will be able to do so to a considerable extent. But let us return to that!

I think it is good that many of these concerns have been raised during the discussion. It has allowed us to develop a better proposal. But one must also remember that some of the counterarguments somewhat contradict each other. Some want even more control. Some say that the control itself burdens the proposal and makes it more difficult to manage. Yes, those arguments do somewhat contradict each other. One has to try to find a way in between, if one wants to reach these groups in a new way. It is about reaching those whom we do not reach today. That is what we want to do.

Regarding personal data, it is well described in the bill how we view this and also that it is a secure processing of personal data that we envision regarding this.

I think it is good that Mats Berglund highlights outdoor life. Here we do something that actually includes children who engage in outdoor life to the same extent as children who engage in sports. That is not always the case. Here it actually becomes a great opportunity.

I have noted that in the outdoor life sector, this is viewed positively. Of course, some objections and concerns that one may have regarding this are raised. But the basic premise in the outdoor life sector is that it is seen as offering new opportunities for children to participate in Swedish outdoor life. I think it would be fantastic if more children than today were given the chance to experience Swedish outdoor life, not least children from vulnerable areas, where the paths out are not always as straight as we would wish.

(Applause)

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

Mats Berglund (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The Minister raises this point regarding broadened recruitment. Yes, to some extent it will naturally become so. If one receives 2,000 kronor, many will use them. But it would have been much more effective to spend that money on strengthening the infrastructure, strengthening the structure, building more arenas and, above all regarding outdoor life, strengthening our nature so that one can get out into nature in a much simpler way. It would have been a significantly better and more effective way to use that money.

Create a cultural school team, so that we can establish the cultural school teachers' professional pride and opportunity, so that we have strong cultural schools across the entire country!

I also actually think that the fact that arguments stand against each other speaks for the fact that it is the model that is wrong. No matter how you turn and twist with this model, it becomes wrong.

I would also like to slightly address what has happened in the previous discussions here at the rostrums. The Minister says that the opposition only wants more of the same.

First and foremost, we have a very strong civil society, outdoor life, sports life, and association life. We have a culture school. In that, Sweden is unique today. Yes, it is clear that we want more of the same. We want more of this strong cultural life and outdoor life. But of course, we also want to think anew.

I mentioned in my speech that we want a culture school, for example, and that we want to change the forest policy so that we do not expand the total area of clear-cuts. It is not fun to sit and grill sausages on a clear-cut. And we want a construction fund to get more facilities. It is about thinking anew. The leisure card is a dead end.

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

Christofer Bergenblock (C)

Mr. Speaker! Initially, I would like to move for approval of reservation 1 under point 1 in the report.

All children in Sweden deserve an active and meaningful leisure time, where they can move, discover new interests, feel community, and build self-esteem. We as human beings must be allowed to grow. It is a matter of public health, participation, and faith in the future.

We know that the needs are great. Four out of five children move too little, and every fourth child in primary school is overweight or obese. Therefore, investments need to be made in activities for children and young people. But the proposal that is now on the table, regarding a state leisure card, is the wrong way to go. It is expensive, bureaucratic, and inefficient, while at the same time it does not solve the underlying problems.

Firstly, there is a risk that the leisure card will not reach the children who need it most. The idea is that the card should be used to pay for activities with state-approved providers, but this presupposes that such providers are available nearby and that children can get there.

In the countryside or in smaller towns, or if one has a disability, it is not certain that there are any activities that are suitable. It is also not certain that the associations will even be approved. Travel to and from the activities is not covered by the card. Leisure activities are not just about payment solutions. It is also about the basic prerequisites. In many parts of the country, it is precisely the lack of prerequisites that is the real obstacle. Therefore, the government should focus on building up capacity instead of spending the money on administration and bureaucracy.

Secondly, the leisure card requires digital registration, logging in, and providing information for both children and parents. This means that the card imposes technical requirements that perhaps not everyone can meet. Families without BankID, without good language skills, or without digital experience may be left out. This applies in particular to children in economic hardship, newcomers, or children with disabilities. There is a risk that families will also hesitate to be included in yet another government register. The government should focus on removing obstacles to enable an active leisure time instead of building up a new technical stumbling block.

For the third, the leisure card represents a declaration of mistrust towards civil society actors, who must now register as providers, follow new administrative routines, and handle a new form of payment. At some point, the air may go out of our voluntarily engaged leaders, who want nothing other than to create movement, community, and development for children and young people but who instead will have to devote even more time and effort to additional administration and bureaucracy. The government should devote itself to facilitating for civil society actors, not making it more difficult for them.

Mr. Speaker! In the Center Party, we do not believe that the solution for children's leisure time is more administration and bureaucracy. We believe in strengthening what already works. We believe in supporting civil society directly via the Swedish Sports Confederation via Sweden's youth organizations, via outdoor organizations, and via study associations. The hundreds of millions that the leisure card is estimated to cost in administration in the coming years could instead have gone directly to the children's football, drama lessons, scout camps, or outdoor life. There, they would have done good directly and truly for more joy, more movement, and more community.

A leisure card for children and young people – an active and meaningful leisure time in community with others

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 12.)

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