(cont. from § 11) General school issues and Fundamentals of education (cont. UbU7 and UbU8)

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Mr. Speaker! I appreciate that Jörgen Grubb raised questions about study skills and reading comprehension in Sweden's schools. If one looks a bit at research and other sources, one can observe that what is absolutely crucial for achieving those goals is actually teachers.

What is the government doing then to get more teachers? Yes, the government is doing nothing. One can also observe that the government is investing less money than the opposition. You say no to differentiated school fees, it looks like. You say no to the Centerpartiets proposal on salary supplements for those schools that need the teachers the most.

You say no to ensuring that there will be more teachers and that there will be more educational places etcetera. The Sweden Democrats straight up propose that there should be fewer educational institutions in Sweden, which makes it harder, not least for rural schools, to get teachers.

Together with increased micro-management from Stockholm, this means it will become harder to get teachers out in the country who can do their jobs. How will the Sweden Democrats work to achieve results in practice, i.e., by ensuring that there are more teachers who can be with the children, instead of just talking about this from the rostrum?

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Mr. Speaker! The member is completely mistaken. Creating study time is positive for both teachers and students. I do not know if the member has anything against this. On the other hand, we know that the students have nothing against it, because they learn more when they get study time. The teachers enjoy it more and get the opportunity to teach and educate the students.

The big problem when it comes to teachers is actually that there are masses of teachers in Sweden who do not work as teachers. The figure fluctuates, but it is between 40,000 and 70,000 who are qualified teachers but do not have a teaching position or do not want to be teachers. One of the biggest reasons why they do not want to be teachers is that there is no study environment in the school.

It is, in fact, rather the opposite of what the member says. We must start in the right direction. Then we will get these teachers back. Furthermore, we have had plenty of study places, and only half have been occupied. Many quit because they do not manage the education. We want good teachers, don't we?

I do not know if the member is against this, but I think we should have good teachers. I believe the students also think so.

Think, think correctly! Do as we do and set good requirements on those who are to become teachers instead of trying to get masses of people into a training program that they cannot complete! It is about time. Both society and the students save time by choosing the right things, instead of being tricked into a training program that they cannot manage.

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Mr. Speaker! I noted that Grubb, in the speaker's chair, spoke about reading comprehension. We were apparently supposed to have spoken about listening comprehension as well. A lot of things were claimed now in the reply that I have not said. It was stated, for example, that I would be against more study time when I was just discussing how we could make it better, or that I would not want to have good teachers.

The problem is that with the government's policy, we get unqualified teachers instead of teachers, even if they are not always as good as we would have wished. It is this that becomes the consequence of the government's policy.

I find it difficult to see why a teacher who has a D in Swedish but receives a teacher education would be worse than an unqualified teacher who perhaps has an E in Swedish. That is the result of the government's policy. I have still not received a single answer from the government's side, despite having raised the issue many times.

I want good teachers. The problem, as said, is that we currently have a huge number of unqualified teachers, especially in the schools that have the greatest problems. We know, and it is well documented, that qualified teachers have fewer problems with study environments than unqualified teachers do. This has been investigated time and again. They report fewer problems.

Why is the government pursuing a policy that leads to more unqualified teachers in the schools? Why do the Sweden Democrats think it will be good? It is primarily schools in rural areas and in areas of exclusion that will be affected. It is already most difficult there. With the government's policy, they will find it even harder to get qualified teachers. I do not understand how this can be a good policy for the whole country, and we want the whole country to have good schools.

It is not enough that the schools in Stockholm's inner city – they are apparently fine, I have seen in the newspaper – have good teachers, all schools must have it. This applies to all schools in the whole of Sweden.

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Regarding this matter of mutual understanding, perhaps the member can listen to the recording themselves. What has been said here has been recorded. I do not believe that I have claimed anything that the member has not said.

Today, a very large number of people graduate from teacher training but do not get jobs. It could be that they are in the wrong location. I myself would not want to force them to move anywhere else to become teachers, at least not if it involves moving from one part of Sweden to another.

One does not scream for teachers in, for example, Malmö. One does not do that. Certain teachers are needed, but it is not a huge number of teaching positions that are available.

In any case, we want competent teachers. Many of the competent teachers do exist, but as I said before, they are outside the staffroom. They are fully qualified, but they are not in the staffroom. Very much depending on the study anxiety, they do not want to be teachers. This perhaps also applies to the areas of social exclusion.

So here we have the big solution. Then we ensure that we sharpen the teacher education. I am aware that we have not submitted that bill yet, but it is coming. Then it will be a high-quality education with reasonable requirements, so that we get good teachers. We think that is a good recipe. We believe more in this than in that which has not worked for all these years.

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! I did not intend to ask about what Niels Paarup-Petersen raised, but I think Jörgen Grubb is still indebted to the answer regarding how the Sverigedemokraterna view that we should have qualified teachers all over the country. We talk too little about that question. I think his answer was not about how we should lure back the 40,000 teachers who are not in school. That answer is what the Sverigedemokraterna and Jörgen Grubb still owe us.

I thought instead that my question should be about what Jörgen Grubb said at the end of his speech, an hour ago. He spoke about Islamization, if I remember correctly. He spoke specifically about religious influence in schools.

Among our reservations available for voting, there is a very clear prohibition against confessional independent schools or, if I shall use words that everyone understands, religious independent schools. We Social Democrats have perceived it as that the Sweden Democrats also want to put a stop to religious independent schools, but the Sweden Democrats are not acting right now to actually do so.

Therefore, my question is: In what way are the Sweden Democrats working so that we can actually achieve a stop for religious independent schools? What we understand is what the Sweden Democrats are for this, and we Social Democrats are presenting concrete proposals on the floor of the Riksdag.

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Mr. Speaker! There are two areas here. This is not included in the area I am talking about – perhaps Niklas Sigvardsson knows that. My colleague will speak about this.

But I can still say it as it is. We do not want Muslim free schools. The Sweden Democrats say no to that. There is a reservation about that as well. We have not gotten anyone else on board with it. Perhaps you can vote for that reservation. It would be very nice if you Social Democrats did that.

I cannot say much more than that we have a clear no.

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! The reason I reacted was that Jörgen Grubb concluded his speech by raising these questions. I considered it relevant to pose the question given that this was taken up in Member Grubb's speech, Mr. Speaker.

We still think that this is important and that we should be able to pass such a proposal. We believe that religious influence, whether it is Muslim or comes from any other belief, should not be a part of the Swedish school system. It actually does not matter which belief it is.

It is possibly there that we and the Sweden Democrats are not entirely in agreement. We do not see it as an individual religious problem but as a general problem. We shall not influence our children and young people with religion in school.

Our proposal for a stop to confessional independent schools, regardless of religious belief, is very clear. Perhaps you cannot vote for our proposal because we do not single out only Muslim independent schools as a problem. We mean that this is a problem regardless of which religious belief it is. I may have misunderstood the member's party's reservation. But one of the reasons why we are very clearly for our reservation is that it concerns confessional orientation, regardless of religious belief.

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to point out to the member that I also spoke very clearly about the issue of honor. I did not speak about individual types of schools, but I addressed what belongs to my area, so to speak.

The issue of honor affects all schools in Sweden – from preschool all the way up to the top of the school system. We would like to get rid of it. It is a difficult thing to get rid of. Every fifth ninth-grader in Malmö has it on their shoulders. This is very serious. It is not us who have conducted our own survey where we have gone out and asked people, but it is several theses, especially from universities, that have shown this. I guess – I only guess – that the members also know a bit about this.

I spoke very strongly about the fact that we must get rid of that problem. It was very clear.

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

Isabell Mixter (V)

Madam Speaker! I would like to ask on a slightly different theme. Sverigedemokraterna were in the previous exchange of remarks a bit on religious schools. There, my party, like the Socialdemokraterna, is clear that it simply shall not be allowed in Sweden. All education shall be free from religious elements in that way.

But as it is today, Swedish tax money, which should go to education, goes to teaching in other countries. The profits that the limited companies make go towards expansion in completely different countries. Among other things, the Swedish independent school group Kunskapsskolan, together with Saab, has made school investments in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. These are hardly places that are free from religious elements.

These schools are also intended to function as chips in arms deals. Peje Emilsson, who is the owner of Kunskapsskolan, has said: Think how much better it will be if the sale of equipment also leads to more people receiving better education!

At these schools, there is also a separate boys' school, for example. The Sweden Democrats speak very poorly of separate education.

I wonder: How can the Sweden Democrats defend that we have free profit extraction in Swedish schools, where tax money is used in this way in completely different countries? Why don't you join forces with us others and put a stop to this madness? That is what I want to ask the member.

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Madam Speaker! I am not familiar with this case. I do not intend to stand here and talk about an individual school, especially not when I am not familiar with this. But it is possible that it is like this. I do not disagree with the member.

We also want different limitations when it comes to the friskolor. What we are talking about is that we want to steer the limitations by setting clear quality requirements. We also want openings in what you sometimes call the principle of public access. We want similar things, such as things that roughly correspond to that. We have no problem with that. We have an investigation on it. We are talking about this and trying to agree on exactly what we want.

What more should I say about independent schools? What I am interested in knowing is: What is your solution to the problem? Is it that you should shut out 400,000 students from school with a snap of a finger? Is that the solution? It is approximately 17–18 percent of all students who go to an independent school every school day. Is this your solution?

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

Isabell Mixter (V)

Madam Speaker! It is quite obvious that Jörgen Grubb does not understand how bad the Swedish independent school system is, because this is not an isolated case.

Even though high-quality teaching is conducted at many of the friskolor, the profit extraction is unlimited. It is not only Kunskapsskolan that is expanding in other countries. Academedia is opening preschools in Germany. We have other large corporations that say their goal is to expand abroad, and they do so with the help of profits from Swedish tax money. This is a system that you legitimize and support, wholeheartedly.

I wonder how you can look the Swedish people in the eye. This is a theft of Swedish tax money, which is being used for preschools and schools in completely other countries, even in dictatorships. It is completely barbaric.

What you are now presenting will not limit this. Those who, according to you, have good quality or who are not under review by the School Inspectorate will be able to extract exactly the same large profits as today. In your proposals, there are no restrictions stating that one should not be allowed to use money for school activities in a country other than Sweden. I think you should be honest about this. And I think Jörgen Grubb should answer the question: Why do you think it is a reasonable system to use money that should go towards children's and students' education to expand in completely different countries?

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Madam Speaker! I must say that I am very interested in how you in Vänsterpartiet intend to solve this. Do you want to shut down approximately 400,000 students? I do not have the exact figure; I will honestly admit that. It is approximately 400,000 students. 17–18 percent of all students today have voluntarily chosen these schools. Is your solution to now shut them down with a snap of your fingers?

I have never heard of any solution. I do not distrust the member; there may be something that even we think is crazy, but we are at least trying to set boundaries for it. Neither you nor any of the parties that actually created this from the beginning have done so.

Today we have independent schools, and they are so popular that 17–18 percent of students attend these schools voluntarily. I can inform the member that the main reason they do so is that they choose away from their nearest municipal school. They do not want to go to independent schools; they choose away from their nearest municipal school. In that case, I think one should sit down and reflect on why it is so and how it could have become so.

When I went to school, there were no such free schools. There were fifty places in Malmö and perhaps a hundred in total in Sweden. How has it become so popular and why? It is a question that I think the Vänsterpartiet should sit down and carefully consider. What is the difference?

I am an old uncle who started in school as early as the late 60s. Think how Sweden looked back then!

(Applause)

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

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Let me tell you about Dalarna, about the landscape where people for generations have cultivated the forest and the land, built communities around industry and small businesses, and let culture grow through music, traditions, and association life. Dalarna is the landscape where villages and towns have been shaped by people's work, entrepreneurship, and responsibility. Development has not come of its own accord but has emerged by many pulling in the same direction. The development within industry, mines, technology, and society could not have occurred in the same way without education. If Dalarna is to continue to develop, the school must function.

Madam Speaker! The fine thing is that this does not only apply to my county but to the whole country. Decisions that we make about the school in this chamber affect what opportunities the children in all of Sweden get to shape their lives and societies in the future.

Madam Speaker! We have a crisis of values in Swedish schools, a crisis where the authority of adults has been eroded, where boundaries have been blurred, and where students respect each other to a too small extent. For every student who disrupts, there is another who is not given peace to work. For every violation, there is another student who finds it increasingly difficult to go to school the next day. For every rule violation that is not followed up, a sense of hopelessness is built among both students and staff. The students who want to learn and try to do the right thing also become the silent losers in this situation. We must never accept a school where children are held back because adults do not have the tools, the time, or the courage to act.

In order for the school to be able to fulfill its mission to educate and nurture, structure, clarity and common norms are required. We must create a school where knowledge is once again allowed to be at the center and where every child is treated with respect.

Unfortunately, far too many students are not only carrying their backpacks on their way to school today, but also a lump of worry in their stomachs for what will be shouted in the corridors this day. According to a measurement from the organization Friends, bullying has doubled over the last ten years. This needs to be met on a broad front with active work from the school's side and with skilled teachers who act and evidence-based anti-bullying programs, but we also need to catch the mental ill-health.

The Christian Democrats are pushing for strengthened student health, healthcare and care initiatives, and initiatives for safe families. It is in families that function and have time that one is loved unconditionally. There, love is not measured in the number of likes and is not priced by the brand on the shirt. In families that have time, we are loved for who we are, not for what we perform or how we look.

Madam Speaker! Several of the school's problems can also be linked to the screens that push out children's movement and sleep and replace them with the endless scrolling, hour after hour, straight into meaninglessness. Homework is pushed aside when the boring tasks compete with all the world's entertainment within just an arm's length. The school must be the force that holds back when the TikTok brain chases quick kicks. It is the boring drudgery that builds the future, not the hunt for the next flashing reward.

Schools need physical books and more reading in general. Reading and books build empathy. By stepping into different characters' lives, students gain a deeper understanding of other people's situations and experiences. It is an important part of building a cohesive society. Flipping through a book is an important counterweight to the digital stress that many young people experience today. More children need to be enchanted by the world of books instead of being distracted by the social media sphere.

Madam Speaker! The problems with vulnerability and bullying are confirmed and deepened by the latest national study from Forum för levande historia, which shows that half of the students are teased in school every year. A somewhat underreported and under-discussed factor is actually that when the figures were broken down by religious identification, they showed that primarily the Christian students are particularly vulnerable. The Christian students are simply overrepresented in the statistics. This has increased by 20 percentage points since the last measurement in 2013.

Another report from the Swedish Christian Council, from 2020, shows the same pattern: Every other Christian youth experiences being offended for the sake of their faith in school. In a quarter of the cases, the students state that it is the teachers who offend. This is, of course, completely unacceptable. To be mocked, belittled, and questioned as a student by one's teacher to whom one is in a position of dependency, and furthermore to be subjected to this in front of one's classmates, shall naturally not happen in a society that has signed on to the human rights and freedoms.

Worst of all in the investigation from Sveriges Kristna Rådd was that the students state that no one cared when they turned to the school for help. That makes the violation double. Everyone who works in the school must in a professional manner be able to handle that in the same way that there are minority groups, there are people with different philosophical and religious convictions. They must, of course, be met with respect.

The school's values rest on a deep ethical tradition with roots in Judeo-Christian ethics and Western humanism. It highlights all people's equal and unique inviolable value, care for the weak, and responsibility for the common good. These ethical principles must be translated into practical action every day in all classrooms. It needs to have greater consequences when the school's values are not respected and students instead choose to treat others poorly and break the school's rules. Without order, compliance with rules, and respect for others, a situation is quickly created where boundaries are blurred and the sense of responsibility and the school community are weakened. In that situation, it is the most vulnerable children who get caught in the crossfire.

In a school with fixed and clear frameworks, warmth, care and learning can instead take the place they need. We therefore need to do more to create order and safety in the school so that more children get the chance to succeed in school, gain power over their lives and can realize their dreams – a school where no one is held back and no one is left behind.

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

(Applause)

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Madam Speaker! Thank you to Mathias Bengtsson for an always genuine commitment to the students' well-being! I appreciate it very much every time the member speaks in the chamber, in the committee, etcetera. That commitment is something we have in common.

Bengtsson highlights the sad fact that people – children – are bullied or subjected to worse things because of their religion. It is not acceptable.

There is a very strong connection between being subjected to bullying and not succeeding in school. In addition to the student's health being affected, this can also impair school results.

I want to ask Mathias Bengtsson if there is a possibility that we, together with the other parties, could move forward and ensure that a clear national strategy against bullying is developed and that students are given more ways to ensure they receive help. Now, the law is being changed so that certain types of harassment are no longer to be reported, and there is perhaps a risk that this could mean that low-key bullying over a long period is not caught in the same way as before. We in the Center Party (C) may be a little worried about that, while at the same time we see that there will be tougher measures against worse cases, which we appreciate very much. But there is a concern among us that repeated bullying will no longer be handled properly. Are there things the parties can do together in that matter?

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

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the questions and for a shared commitment to these issues!

We naturally do not want any child to have to go to school with a lump in their stomach from worry about bullying or harassment. Kristdemokraterna would like to see legislation ensuring that all schools have an evidence-based anti-bullying program. We would like to see a national knowledge center against bullying that can provide national guidelines, teach best practice, and so on. Much of this, also linked to rules of order and the duty of teachers and principals to take care of such matters, will also be included in the bills that the government lays before the Riksdag during the spring.

When it comes to the teachers' administrative burden, there is, in a sense, a conflict of objectives. If teachers are to be able to maintain order in the classroom and see and take care of all students, they need to devote a lot of time to the students and actually as little time as possible to administration and bureaucracy in general. Then it becomes a conflict of objectives. How much should one need to document and administer regarding harassment and bullying?

I think the government has landed on a reasonable balance where there can be slightly less documentation than today. For minor offenses, one should not have to administer and write down as much as today. My and the government's assessment is not that it will reduce the anti-bullying work, but that it will work and even make it so that teachers get more time to see the student.

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Madam Speaker! Thank you again to the member! I hope it is correct as the member said and that it is where we are headed.

I agree that there is a conflict of objectives. Many times it is the case that things that can be good take time away from something else that is good. I have full respect for that.

There is a lot of talk about safety valves these days in politics. The Centre Party has actually proposed that there should be a safety valve in this area. It should be possible to report to the School Inspectorate via a kind of whistleblower function those times when schools do not take care of this type of problem. We have seen in both municipal and independent schools that many girls have been subjected to very serious things. This applies, among other things, to IES. But we have also seen major problems at municipal schools in, for example, Malmö that have not been addressed. One way to ensure that things are taken care of even those times when the teacher might not have seen them would be for there to be a way for the students to report.

Now the principle of public access is being broadened, which is wonderful. I want to thank the government for having worked on it, even if it was due to a bit of pressure.

What do the members think about introducing a type of safety valve that would allow an individual student, who sees that a report of a violation is not being acted upon by the school, to be able to take another path?

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

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! I am not completely up to speed on the details of the Center Party's proposal, but generally, I believe it is important that there are instances to refer matters to. The first instance is the principal. If one does not think that teachers take bullying or peace at work seriously, it must be clear that the principal has that responsibility at a school.

As I understand it, one can already today contact the School Inspectorate. The School Inspectorate reviews schools based on a risk assessment. If the School Inspectorate receives information that it is not working in certain schools, they inspect them. Perhaps more such functions are needed. I have no fixed opinion in that case, but I share the member's view that what is important is that there should be several levels to which questions can be raised so that no one falls through the cracks when they are subjected to bullying. That we can never accept.

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

Isabell Mixter (V)

Madam Speaker! All students deserve the best possible education, which enables them to reach their full potential. Education should equip the young with the knowledge required to become tomorrow's nursing assistants, engineers, bus drivers, and teachers.

Sweden's school was once world-leading in being egalitarian and equal. Several speakers have said this here today. Many of those with me are part of their family's first generation to come from working-class homes and continue their studies at university. The class background in one's home was not decisive for how things would go in school. The school was able to be compensatory. Something has happened with the school since then.

Today, far too much of a child's education is determined by the zip code. Those who live in the suburbs or in the countryside get worse opportunities than children in the city center. Those who have well-educated parents often fare well in school, while those who do not fare worse. Students do not receive the support they need to succeed in school. At the same time, tax funds intended for children's education go straight into shareholders' pockets instead of to the students.

The foundation of the school system has been worn apart due to the free school choice. Children with greater needs attend municipal schools to a greater extent. At the same time, all students receive the same bag of money with them to the school they have chosen. It is a completely unreasonable system. We need to re-establish an equal and equivalent school where all students get the same chance to succeed in school.

We see how class sizes have increased as cuts have swept like a wildfire across the municipalities over the last decades. The system of per-pupil funding has also contributed strongly to there being strong economic incentives to increase class sizes. We need, on the contrary, to reduce them. It would be the single most important factor, I argue, to reduce the so-called noise in school and create a calmer and better school environment.

All students could be seen and receive the support they need. Therefore, we need to look at a regulation of class sizes in schools. I note that the Liberals, who are no longer in the chamber, have popped such a popcorn out of their popcorn machine. But the question is what is most important for the Liberals: that the school is not ugly or that the classes have a reasonable size? It can be considered a rhetorical question since they are not here and cannot answer. For Vänsterpartiet, it is clear that class sizes need to be reduced.

Madam Speaker! All students shall receive high-quality education. The state needs to guarantee equal education across the entire country. As it is now, the municipalities are forced into an impossible task. During the mandate period, the government has chosen to cut the appropriations and lower the taxes for the richest instead of ensuring that municipalities and regions receive the money required to not be forced into cuts. Sveriges Lärare has warned that the worst cuts in 30 years are now occurring in the school.

The state needs to take responsibility for the school. It is obvious that the mix of the municipalization of the school and the introduction of the free school system has made the school unequal and caused the results to drop like a stone.

State funding is needed, and equality is needed. State accountability is needed for those places where it is difficult to provide education today. Several members have been up and spoken about this. It applies to the countryside and to the suburbs.

In places like Kiruna and Ånge, it is difficult to find qualified teachers. In those places, it is difficult to make the school as good as it should be. Therefore, one needs to look at whether certain locations need more support than others, whether they need to receive funding to fulfill their mission, and whether they need support to solve the skills shortage.

Vänsterpartiet wants to nationalize the school. It is necessary to ensure that the school becomes equal. We want to see a broad parliamentary inquiry to look at how the state can take over the responsibility.

Madam Speaker! Many have opinions about school. We have all attended school, and many of us have children who attend school today. Many are the opinions about school meals, homework, and whether more discipline is needed in school or not. In many ways, these are questions that should be decided by professionals, that is to say, by those who work in school every day. It is principals, teachers, teachers in after-school care, special educators, and many others who know what is needed on the ground.

Even the students, who attend school every day, need to be involved and have influence over the school. Just as Niklas Sigvardsson from Socialdemokraterna wants me to be clear, I believe that it is the teachers who should decide in the classroom, so that no one misunderstands this. Student influence is, however, important. It is proven that student influence improves students' results and well-being. It also prepares them for a future in working life, so that they can not only take orders but also be participatory as employees.

Madam Speaker! This government has said that a complete renovation of the friskola system shall be carried out. I do not know how you others view the concept of complete renovation, but in my world, it is not to fix a water-damaged bathroom with a bit of silver tape. A complete renovation means in my world that one tears out what is damaged and starts building from the ground up. With the government's promised reforms in the area, the limited companies will be able to continue laughing all the way to the bank. They will be able to continue investing abroad, open waffle stands for money intended for the school, and take out very large profits.

It is actually barbaric that it is allowed to continue like this year after year. In all other countries except Sweden, it is forbidden to extract profit from schools that are financed with public funds.

For my party, it is clear that limited companies have no place in the world of schools. The whole idea with having a limited company is to make a profit, and that cannot be synonymous with conducting school activities. It is therefore obvious that a change of government in 2026 is needed to put a stop to this once and for all.

Madam Speaker! Something that has not been mentioned much in today's debate is that we need to see the entirety of the children's schooling. The after-school centers conduct a very important activity both before and after school hours. Today, the after-school centers are in many and many ways a deprioritized part of the school's world that is rarely talked about much in the debate, despite it being so important.

I believe that we have all, at some point when we have left our children at after-school care, felt that the student groups are far too large and there is too little staff. Today, the average is just over 50 children per student group in the after-school centers, according to statistics from Sveriges Lärare. It speaks for itself that there are far too many children for one to have time to ensure that the activities become meaningful and that all children are seen.

Furthermore, the qualification level among those working in the after-school centers is low. Only 23 percent of those working there are qualified to be after-school teachers. If we are to have more qualified teachers, more colleagues and smaller student groups are needed. Vänsterpartiet therefore wants that it is looked into introducing a cap for the size of the children's groups in the after-school centers. There are recommendations when it comes to preschool, but unfortunately, the municipalities do not follow them. For the after-school centers, there are no recommendations at all. I think it is time that we look at it.

Madam Speaker! I would like to conclude by moving for approval of reservation 21 in the Education Committee's report 8 and reservation 26 in the Education Committee's report 7.

(Applause)

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Madam Speaker! It is with mixed enthusiasm that I hear the Left Party member speak about the school. One could think that we are always against each other, but there are actually some gems.

State-controlled school? Absolutely! I hope that we can get it together. I believe that at least one more party agrees on this. It would, of course, be nice to have a majority. I believe that it would have been of great help to us all, even if it hadn't solved all the problems; there is, after all, nothing that would do that.

The Leader of the Opposition speaks a lot about school fees, and that is not entirely uninteresting. Since we have a municipal school, it is the municipalities that have the school fees.

I come from Malmö. As everyone knows, it is Sweden's third largest city. There, the schools are mixed, so to speak. There are schools both in well-functioning areas – if I may say so; it is not to make fun of anyone – as in so-called marginalized areas. There are, of course, also areas that are a mixture.

The private schools in a municipality receive an average of the school funding. Some of the municipal schools, however, receive very low school funding compared to the average, while other municipal schools receive very high school funding. The member speaks a lot about those schools where there are problems with reading comprehension and the like. It varies a bit, but let us say that these schools in Malmö receive around 50 percent more than the other schools. It is an extremely large amount of money, but still, it is not going so well.

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

Isabell Mixter (V)

Madam Speaker! I did not quite catch the question from Jörgen Grubb. However, I understand it to be about the school fee and that in my speech I spoke about that system of student fees that we have today is not so appropriate.

I have been a local politician, so I know very well how this hits in the current situation. For example, Sundsvall Municipality, which I come from, chose to increase the school fee because the municipality wanted to invest in the school. Like a letter in the mail, we then received an inflation of independent schools that wanted to open in Sundsvall Municipality, because they could make larger profits when the school fee increased.

Sundsvall Municipality was also one of the first municipalities to receive an administrative judgment against it. The municipality's schools had fallen behind, and the independent actors demanded to receive compensation for this. Even though they might not have even had those costs, they would receive compensation with exactly the same amount of money as the municipal schools. It became a judgment where one went back several years in time. We had to pay for five years, I believe. We also had to retroactively pay out school fees to John Bauer's bankruptcy estate, which was no longer conducting school activities. This is very strange to me. It is also not a way to guarantee that children receive an education – these funds went to someone who was no longer providing education.

I mean that a huge problem with today's student grant system is that one can receive compensation for something that one actually does not even do. A student is a bag of money; that is how the system looks.

I wonder how Jörgen Grubb views the way things look in Sweden today.

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Madam Speaker! We are also not satisfied with the municipalities controlling the school funding. Then I can agree when it comes to the bankruptcy estate. I also do not feel that it is a necessity, but that is how the law is. I cannot do much about that here in a school debate.

What I mean is that the municipality differentiates the school funding that it gives to its various schools in the municipality. This means that the schools which the member himself said need more support for reading comprehension already receive 50 percent more money per pupil today, at least in Malmö – I know that it differs between different municipalities. Then one should actually subtract what is common, such as the building, rent, heating, cooling, and all those parts. They can in principle have twice as high variable costs, twice as many teachers, and twice as many books, or whatever it may be. Is this reasonable when it still doesn't result in particularly much better results? That is what I wonder. I understand that one needs to have some differentiation; I am aware of that. But is it reasonable that there are such large differences?

I have two daughters myself who have gone through the entire school system and also graduated from university. According to their naive father, they would attend the nearest school, the municipal school. That is what they did for five or six years. Then they switched to another municipal school, and there they had their own Swedish schoolmate. There were about 15–16 students in the classroom. The school didn't actually need the money, but it was distributed to that type of school. Is this reasonable when other schools have to stand back?

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

Isabell Mixter (V)

Madam Speaker! Within the student grant or the school fee, it is possible for municipalities to introduce what is called structural grants, that is to say that the school fee is weighted, for example, based on whether the students have parents with a lower educational background. That a student is foreign-born can also be a parameter.

When Jörgen Grubb explained, it sounded a bit as if one only gives structural grants to municipal schools, but it is equal for everyone. Also, independent entities that have that type of student structure receive such structural grants. One cannot, therefore, choose which school one wants to give it to. I can swear that one also cannot increase the structural grant so that it constitutes 50 percent of the school money, but it is a significantly smaller part. I think the member simplifies when he asks if it is reasonable that others receive less money.

At the same time, Jörgen Grubb's party now has a government cooperation with the Tidö parties, and he completely ignores that a considerable amount of school funding goes to profits for shareholders. It is legislation that the government has the opportunity to change. If one is concerned that schools should receive more money, one should address the systemic error that we have in Swedish schools today. It could make it possible to give schools with a different structure of the student body more money than they receive today.

I hope that Jörgen Grubb is open to looking at this. If one wants to ensure that all students in Swedish schools receive a good education, one must plug the profit gap that exists today.

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Madam Speaker! I vote in favor of reservation 9 in UbU7 and reservation 7 in UbU8.

Swedish school is fantastic at its core. An incredibly large number of teachers – nine out of ten – are very satisfied with their jobs. The students are doing well overall. Great efforts are made every single day. We have a school that is accessible to everyone, for the most part. Everyone is allowed to go there, and everyone is allowed to choose. That is not bad. At its core, there is much in Swedish school that is good, but unfortunately, some are constantly trying to paint it as bad. I do not want to contribute to this, so again: Swedish school is fantastic, but yes, there are also problems there.

I would say that there are three big problems in Swedish schools today. The first problem is that we have the most students without eligibility in all of Western Europe. Every year we send out 20,000 students who do not get into upper secondary school, who do not get a profession, and who do not get a job. The second problem is that, from Malmö to Malmfältet, there is a shortage of qualified teachers. We have the largest proportion of teachers without full qualification in all of Western Europe. The third problem is that we have a government that does not care.

Centerpartiet wants to see measures that make a real difference in these areas. First and foremost, students must be given the opportunity to move forward even if they have not passed school. We are going to get a new grading system, and I am happy about that. It has required a lot, but now we are on track so that one can actually be rewarded for their effort even if one does not receive a pass. One gets the opportunity to apply further based on their average, not on three grades that must be passed, which excludes a lot of students.

The government has set a Swedish record in dropouts. Never before in Swedish history, Madam Speaker, have so many students left school without passing grades and without being able to move forward, and an additional 100,000 students will graduate before any of the government's reforms affecting this can take effect. The government is quite satisfied.

Centerpartiet already wants to give students the opportunity to apply further to the vocational programs without having E in Swedish, English, and mathematics. This would halve the number of students who cannot proceed. This could be done quite quickly. One can already get in based on merit, but just the weak students are not allowed to proceed in that way, as everyone else is. It is very strange. In all other European countries, you are allowed to. Therefore, we have an enormous exclusion, but the government does not want to do anything about it.

Madam Speaker! It is truly time for a policy that creates an equal school across the entire country, where a child's future is not determined by their zip code.

In Gällivare, 47.1 percent of the teachers are currently unqualified. In Kiruna, the figure is 52.4 percent. The School Minister does not even answer the school principals' questions when they try to get answers, but she wants to train 1,000 fewer teachers every year. How this helps Gällivare and Kiruna, I can understand that the school principal would like to know, but again: the School Minister does not want to answer questions.

The Sweden Democrats demand that there should be fewer teacher training programs across the country. They want to cut them down so that it becomes even harder for the municipalities that are furthest from the educational institutions to get teachers, because that is how it is: the closer it is to a training site, the easier it is to get teachers. Kiruna and Gällivare are not close, I can say.

The government is therefore doing nothing in the current situation to get more teachers. Instead, it is one stunt after another regarding things that create headlines in the newspapers and trouble in the schools. That is the reality today.

Centerpartiet, on the other hand, obviously has concrete proposals that make a difference. We want to introduce a state wage supplement of 5,000 kronor per month to attract qualified teachers to places like Kiruna and Gällivare, but also to the marginalized schools in Malmö. For that, it is not only the mining district that has problems, but Malmö also has, and likewise a large part of the rural areas in Dalarna, Jämtland, Värmland etcetera.

We want to expand the teacher training programs across the entire country through a major investment in learning centers so that more people can train in their home locations. Again: That is where they are. That is where we must go to get them. If they are to be teachers in the schools located where they come from, we must train them closer to that location. We know this. Everyone knows it. That is how it works according to the statistics.

We also want to provide the opportunity to write off student debts for those who move to rural municipalities such as Gällivare and Kiruna. It may not be rural directly, but these are municipalities that have difficulty recruiting staff who can work in welfare professions.

We also want to provide support for the training of unqualified teachers, because we know that there are very many unqualified teachers. The government wants there to be more teachers, but we want them to receive training so that they can become qualified. Then more students can have a qualified teacher. It is not more difficult than that.

Madam Speaker! We also want to change the state's funding from targeted government grants to sector grants, in order to reduce administration, contribute to stability and increase local influence. It is not the case that every school in Sweden needs the same thing.

Time and again, we sit with this government and discuss proposals that are extremely Stockholm-centered or at least city-centered. We say: We have several here who come from smaller municipalities that have small schools. Then we are told that the most important thing now is that all schools should lock their doors and invest hundreds of thousands of kronor in new locking systems. Oh? In Malmö, they have already done that, because it was necessary. But the small schools in many places have not done it, because it is not necessary. Instead, there are local collaborations, perhaps with nannies who use the sports hall. That is how it works around the country. It is different, but the government believes that the same solution can be used in the whole country. It doesn't hold. It actually doesn't hold.

We naturally want to distribute the state's grants, not just in sector grants that come directly in place of targeted state grants, but also according to actual needs based on social conditions but also sparsity. We know that sparsity is also a factor that makes the school more expensive.

These are things that the government could have done. But what is the government doing right now? Well, they think that children should be punished, that children should have school uniforms, that ugly schools should be banned, that student influence should be banned and that students should be deported. That is the package from the government, Madam Speaker. That is not what the Swedish school needs. It actually isn't.

The Liberals say that the school should be nationalized. How many out there feel that they want much more of this – that Mohamsson's move should become direct law? Is that what you long for, dear teachers? I am very skeptical.

I want an evidence-based school that gives power to the teachers. It requires a different view of teachers and of the school than the one we have today. I want evidence-based decisions. I do not want us in the Riksdag to decide what is evidence. We have no idea about that. The government wants us to decide what teaching methods should look like. I want us to leave that to the profession, to science, to the teachers and to the principals. They are the ones who know, not us. I also want student influence, because there is evidence for that. And if we are to have an evidence-based school, Madam Speaker, we must also have an evidence-based policy. But right now, we are probably further from that than we have ever been. It is very unfortunate.

Madam Speaker! I hope that we can begin to take steps that move away from the current situation, that return power to those who can actually do this here and that ensure we build a school that is about how students can get into upper secondary school, learn a trade and get a future. We must give power back to the teachers and the profession.

This requires many different reforms. Some of what the government has done on that front is good, but very much is also completely crazy.

I hope for a new school policy after the election.

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

Camilla Hansén (MP)

Madam Speaker! It is beginning to thin out in the rows of benches as the evening progresses, but some must still carry the debate all the way to the adjournment.

Education and cultivation are keys to freedom and equality and to a sustainable democratic society where everyone is given the opportunity to contribute. The school shall give all children a chance to grow and develop their abilities and awaken the desire for learning throughout life. To learn for life is about both basic knowledge and the ability for reflection and critical thinking to understand the world around us.

Education and cultivation are the cornerstone of a free democratic society and strengthen the individual's opportunities for independence and self-realization. A strong education system and lifelong learning is an investment that equips individuals and builds a society where everyone can contribute.

That is why Miljöpartiet wants to invest in equal education of the highest quality with strong public funding. We want more people to dream of becoming teachers, to be able to attend a really good teacher education, and to become skilled teachers in Sweden's schools. Teachers are our country's most important profession.

Madam Speaker! I will address some questions and, in the best-case scenario, clearly explain the motions.

We have discussed the market school a great deal here today. The school's purpose should always be education, never profit. That is why profit-oriented limited companies do not belong in the school.

The market school has created a logic for the education sector that changes the conditions not only for those schools that distribute profits but also for other independent and municipal schools. If we want to create a society that holds together, the school must be part of the solution and not something that increases differences between groups in society.

The market school has made the working situation more difficult for principals and teachers because it has turned students into revenue and parents into customers. Furthermore, the development is moving towards greater detailed regulation of the school and a larger supervisory apparatus so that certain school companies cannot cut down too much on quality in order to make larger profits. This affects the teachers because it increases the administrative burden and shrinks their professional space to that which is easy to measure and easy to compare. It is not necessarily what is most important to be able to when one leaves the school.

Therefore, it is high time to ban the profit-distributing limited companies schools and remove the market logic from the school. Until a ban on profit distribution has been introduced, it is necessary to introduce an immediate establishment ban as well as give the municipalities' "no" to profit-driven schools real weight when new establishments are reviewed.

Part of the market's logic is trade secrets. In competitive situations, it is not strange that one wants to keep recipes for success secret, but in a publicly funded education system, it is harmful and unfair.

There are no reasons not to immediately introduce the principle of public access in all schools in Sweden. Sweden has a long tradition of openness and transparency regarding the exercise of public authority. Schools engage in this, and they manage large amounts of tax money. That all independent schools are not covered by the principle of public access is therefore completely unreasonable. It should be introduced as soon as possible and without any limitations.

Madam Speaker! Something that has also been touched upon during today's debate is the digitalization of schools and the societal upheaval that we are in. It has been ongoing for a while now and will continue far into the future. This is, of course, a clear challenge, but it is also an opportunity.

Digitalization in education and research is about everything from when and how much it is appropriate to use digital teaching materials to prepare pupils and students for a working life and a social life that does not resemble anything we have grown up with, to using the possibilities of digitalization for the best of social development.

Digitalization encompasses the administration of education and research and the knowledge development of children, pupils, and students to become full citizens in a digital society. Digitalization affects knowledge acquisition, so it is of utmost importance that digitalization is based on research and proven experience and that decisions regarding pedagogical work are made by skilled teachers and school leaders, who are the ones who are to do the work. This shall not be regulated in detail from Rosenbad.

Sweden as a country needs a strategy for how we should approach digitalization in schools, but it is completely lacking. This government has no leadership whatsoever when it comes to the digitalization of schools and the school system. They go into details and would like to decide what should happen in the classroom. What we need is a strategy for how we approach the digitalization of schools in a responsible way that strengthens Sweden and us who live here now and in the future.

Perhaps there are some glimmers of hope now that the AI strategy contains a few words about what the school should achieve, but there is no money or anything in the action plan about how this is to be done.

Madam Speaker! Another issue that has been raised previously and which is important for many of us is student influence. All opposition parties stand together in defending student influence in Swedish schools.

We know that trust and confidence in politics and society's institutions has decreased. This is shown, for example, by the Youth Barometer. It is a worrying development that must be taken seriously. Therefore, political solutions were also needed in order for the trend to be reversed.

It is important that children and young people, already at an early age, gain an understanding of democratic dialogue and what it means to make one's voice heard and to take responsibility. Therefore, it is important that students in school are able to organize themselves independently. Children and young people should be able to practice democracy for real already in school, and they should be able to influence their everyday life in school.

Madam Speaker! It is of course the teachers who lead the teaching. I believe almost all opposition members have said this now, and it is also clear in the public debate that this is not questioned in any way. This does not, however, mean that the students should not have influence over their schooling.

Our view is that the government intends to reduce students' influence over, for example, school rules, and that this risks reducing both students' participation as well as the legitimacy of the rules and compliance with them. We believe that one must ensure and safeguard students' influence in the Swedish school.

As an MP for the Green Party, I want to particularly emphasize that the students have the best knowledge of what the school is like from their perspective and what their everyday lives look like. The students' statutory influence is a natural part of a strong school. It can involve the school supporting the students' organization and working in a structured manner with student safety representatives and safety rounds.

I have an absolutely excellent example of this from a secondary school that I visited quite recently. There, the schedule simply had not become good for the students, and they pointed this out to the adults, who have a completely different schedule during the day and the week. The adults understood that it was not good, and the schedule was changed so that it became good for the students and their learning.

What the students said is that it is important with the organized student welfare work, but it is also important that they know they are being listened to when they have knowledge about the school that the adults need to take part in. It does not mean that one always gets what they want, but the students know that they are being listened to. It is a fundamental part of Swedish student influence.

There are also some areas that worry me a little. It is about that in upcoming proposals, one wants to weaken knowledge about, for example, sexuality and relationships. We see in surveys – among others, Mathias Bengtsson from Kristdemokraterna mentioned the report Unga tycker om andra – that for example, attitudes towards homosexuals, bisexuals, and trans people have worsened during recent years. Therefore, it is very important to strengthen those parts of the education, not weaken them.

Madam Speaker! I move for approval of reservation 39 on the school's digitalization and AI under point 17 in the report UbU7 Overall school issues.

I also move for approval of reservation 13 regarding strengthened education concerning sexuality, consent and relationships under point 7 in report UbU8 Basic aspects of education.

(Applause)

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

Kent Kumpula (SD)

Madam Speaker! In order to save time, we have merged two debates into one. I intended to focus on the report UbU7 Overall school issues.

In the report, the Education Committee treats no fewer than 150 motions, which shows how important this area is. Many of the motions are of a general nature, which can almost be heard in the report's title – General school issues. I thought, despite the general nature, I would be so bold as to focus on one specific motion.

I believe it is a motion that many of our political opponents are deliberately trying to dodge, simply because it is an issue that is uncomfortable for the left side to discuss and debate. It is a well-known fact that many try to pretend that uncomfortable issues do not exist. Instead, the Social Democrats and the parties on the left side repeatedly bury their heads in the sand and hope that the difficult stuff will somehow magically resolve itself.

It is a bit like the refugee crisis that Sweden was hit by during decades – long before the whole thing culminated in 2015. Year in and year out, for a long period before 2015, Sweden received enormously many more migrants every year than we could manage to integrate and bring into society at all. This was nothing that suddenly "happened" in 2015, but it was, as said, ongoing year after year long before that.

The irresponsible flow of migrants to Sweden over decades is a background to why the motion I want to raise here today unfortunately was needed. Sweden is considered today as one of the world's most secularized countries, but no one can deny that the Sweden we have today rests on a Christian foundation and on Christian values. The motion I move for approval has the title Prohibition of Muslim free schools, Madam Speaker, and is written by Richard Jomshof.

I therefore move for approval of reservation 34 in report UbU7. The Riksdag should, of course, stand behind an immediate stop to the establishment of new independent schools with a Muslim profile and the closure of those independent schools with a Muslim profile that already exist.

There are today almost infinitely many examples of just Muslim private schools in Sweden that have been forced to close, for a multitude of different reasons, following alarms from the School Inspectorate or the Security Service. It has concerned everything from the children risking radicalization and being exposed to violence-oriented extremism to a strongly unequal treatment of boys and girls. For example, boys and girls have not been allowed to use the same door handles, and girls with menstruation have not been welcome to parts of the education – and so on, and so forth.

Friskolor with a Muslim profile have even been closed because tax money has been sent abroad, to associations with unclear links to terrorism. Year in and year out, friskolor with a Muslim profile in Sweden have repeatedly been exposed as pure Islamist radicalization nests.

Of all the independent schools that have been forced to close in Sweden between 2019 and the end of 2024, more than 90 percent have had a Muslim profile. One must also keep in mind that the Muslim independent schools were a very small minority of all confessional independent schools that existed in Sweden during that time. Nevertheless, they accounted for 90 percent of the schools that were forced to close. That alone says a great deal.

Madam Speaker! We cannot have it this way in the world's most secularized country. When it repeatedly turns out that it is precisely the Muslim free schools that are not behaving, we must take our responsibility and close those schools.

From an integration perspective, there are also only advantages to completely banning independent schools with a Muslim profile. As we all know, Sweden is a country with a Christian history, and Sweden rests on Christian values. It can only be to the detriment of integration and for the children if they are kept segregated in Muslim independent schools. Adaptation to Sweden and to Swedish values will naturally become more difficult for those children who are kept isolated from the Swedish community, from Christian values, and from the equality that, despite everything, is the norm in Sweden today.

It is not Christian or Jewish confessional schools that are the problem. One cannot generalize everyone, but when there is such an enormous majority of Muslim independent schools among the schools that are forced to close due to radicalization or other reasons, it is those schools that should be closed – not all confessional independent schools.

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! If I was too quick in connection with Member Grubb's speech, it is right to request a reply here.

Making a distinction between the confessional friskolor depending on which religious beliefs they hold, we Social Democrats perceive as completely incorrect, especially considering that there are documented conditions of neglect even at other schools with other religious beliefs.

School policy should not be anecdotal. But now, I happen to have grown up in one of those areas where there is a high density of different religious communities, but where we also have a school that is not registered as confessional but should be, and which started during the time I was a primary school student. There, for one year, girls and boys attended together in my class and in classes around it. The school, which belongs to a Christian sect, I could call it, started a semester later in another location. There, girls and boys do not eat together and do not have physical education together. It was approximately this that I perceived the member was talking about when it comes to Muslim and Islamic schools.

It means that this is a problem regardless of religious belief. It is a problem that we run schools and have education based on which religion we have. That school does not want us Social Democrats to influence any child in this society. Parents have, according to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the right to raise their children according to the religious belief they themselves choose. But Swedish society should not allow us to run schools on the basis of that religious belief. That is why we Social Democrats, in our proposal, instead focus on confessional schools regardless of religious belief.

What is the problem with introducing such a ban instead of clearly pointing out the Muslim schools, in this case?

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

Kent Kumpula (SD)

Madam Speaker! The problem is that such an enormous majority of the Muslim preschools and primary schools have had to close due to radicalization and so on. It is not the Christian schools.

The committee members took up a specific case – it is obviously regrettable. Regardless of what religious orientation one has, we should not have sects running schools. A Christian school that is radicalized, if one exists, should of course close. But if there is a Christian school that is radicalized and run by a sect, it does not mean that 99 schools that behave themselves should also close – because one school is bad. But if, on the other hand, it is 99 out of 100 Muslim schools that are radicalized and make a distinction between boys and girls, then that is the problem. One must be able to see the problem and admit that it is a problem.

To turn a blind eye to it, sweep everything under the rug and say "no, then we forbid everything" does not work. It would not be fair. That is not the problem. We are to solve the problems that exist, and if there are sects running Christian schools, these shall of course be closed. But that is not the norm for Christian confessional schools. Unfortunately, it seems to be the norm for Muslim confessional schools.

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! This shows a very clear ideological difference between us Social Democrats and the Sweden Democrats. For us, religious belief does not matter; rather, it is about the principle. Regardless of which religious belief one has, we do not believe that the Swedish school system should rest on a confessional basis, but rather it should rest on science and proven experience and focus on the children's learning. Children should be able to have a place where they do not need to be part of the religious congregation that their parents have chosen. Parents are fully free to teach and raise children according to religious belief, but the Swedish school shall be a place where everyone, regardless of religious belief, is included and taught together.

That is why we Social Democrats, for principled reasons, do not make a distinction based on what religious beliefs one has, which I think is a fairly reasonable stance. We have documented cases in more than one school. I took up a clear example. But we have seen media reporting during this parliamentary term and also previous parliamentary terms concerning different types of schools of different confessional types that have problems. One has been able to see long-term mental ill-health and the like among students who have attended those types of schools.

With that said, I am not going to say that they are bad schools outright. I do not want it to be perceived as if I am completely massacring all schools, but it is about a very clear principle. There are also many good schools that have a confessional orientation, but we believe in principle that a school should rest on a scientific basis and proven experience and be built on pedagogical education and not on the confessional basis.

We Social Democrats want, instead of making a distinction between Christian, Hindu, or Muslim schools, to ensure that we have a principle which means that confessional schools, regardless of religious belief, are not permitted in this country.

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

Kent Kumpula (SD)

Madam Speaker! I understand the principle that the member is trying to highlight, but I still do not quite understand how he makes the mathematics add up. If it is one or two – it may be more than one – Christian schools that have problems, then those two schools should be closed. But if it concerns two out of a hundred schools, it is not proportional to close a hundred schools.

An enormous majority of all Muslim independent schools that exist at all have been forced to close. Almost all have been forced to close due to radicalization, different treatment of boys and girls, and so on. The school system has sounded the alarm, and the Security Service is sounding the alarm. Even preschools have been forced to close because the children are at risk of radicalization. We had a number of preschools in Uppsala that were forced to close due to the radicalization of the children. No one is surprised that they were Muslim preschools – unfortunately, I must say. It would be great if it weren't a problem, but it is a problem.

We must solve what is a problem. We cannot solve fictitious problems that do not exist. To turn a blind eye to the fact that an enormous majority of the problems exist in the Muslim free schools is not honest and is not fair. I have not calculated the figures, but the overrepresentation must be hundreds of percent. It is a completely enormous overrepresentation, if practically all Muslim preschools and schools have been forced to close due to radicalization while very few Christian ones have. It points to the fact that the same problem does not really exist in the two types of schools.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on March 11.)

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