(cont. from § 15) Access to culture (cont. KrU5)

Kristoffer Lindberg (S)

Madam Speaker! I would first like to move for approval of the Social Democrats' reservation 4.

Today's debate addresses the committee's report 5 Access to Culture. It is a report that spans a breadth of activities, issues, and areas. I want to devote my speech to some parts that are of great importance specifically for access to culture.

It concerns, among other things, the regional culture, with the regional and municipal cultural institutions as well as the free cultural life regionally and locally. These are enormously important for the culture's infrastructure but also for employment opportunities for cultural creators throughout the country. The State's relationship to these is constituted not only but primarily by the cultural cooperation model, which has been applied since 2011 for the distribution of state funds to regional and local cultural activities.

The Government decided in July 2022 to task a special investigator with conducting a review of the cultural cooperation model. The investigator presented their assignment in September 2023, and the investigation received a number of comments and objections when it was subsequently sent out for consultation. Since then, we have also not seen any proposition from the Government on the floor of the Riksdag based on the investigation's proposals.

However, just over a year ago, the government commissioned the Swedish Arts Council to, based on the analysis from the investigation and the comments received during the referral, submit proposals on how the cultural cooperation model can be further developed. That assignment was reported in October last year. Whether this will lead to any changes in the cultural cooperation model or not remains to be seen.

It is clear, however, Madam Speaker, that the state's share of the funds in the cultural cooperation model has decreased for a long time, while the regions and municipalities have increased their shares. This year, the government does indeed make an increase of the grant by 2.8 million kronor. This must, however, be seen as quite modest, especially since for the next two years, further reductions of over 40 million are announced.

This is about precisely that cultural activity which helps to achieve the cultural policy goal that everyone shall have the opportunity to participate in cultural life. It is about access to culture – in the entire country.

We know that many regions and municipalities testify that they do what they can to compensate for the reduced state commitment, while at the same time having a very tough economic situation as a result of increased costs and reduced state grants. Taken together, this development is already today leading to a decrease in access to culture for us outside the large cities, and we thus also risk making it difficult for the state cultural policy goals to be achieved.

We Social Democrats have a hope that everyone sees the importance of regional cultural activities and have therefore, in order to break the negative development, proposed a reinforcement for this year of 100 million to the cultural cooperation model.

Madam Speaker! Culture develops us as human beings, both individually and as a collective, when we share cultural experiences or create together. It strengthens the cohesion in a society, while it also challenges our thoughts and helps us see new perspectives.

Culture is strongly linked with education. All people have a right to culture and education, and we know that our cultural habits are created as early as childhood. The school therefore has an incredibly important role to play so that all children and young people have the right to the experiences and personal development contained in individual creation and professional culture. The National Agency for Education's curriculum also states that cultural experiences shall be a part of learning.

But access to culture and personal creation for children and young people is unequally distributed. In some schools and municipalities, there is already exemplary work – not infrequently linked to the state grant for Skapande skola, which has been mentioned earlier in the debate. But we also see that there are students who rarely or never come into contact with cultural experiences during their school time. Skapande skola reaches 70 percent of primary school students today. This means that between 300,000 and 400,000 children every year are not reached by Skapande skola.

Madam Speaker! In many municipalities, as has been said, work is already being carried out today based on various forms of municipal cultural guarantees for children in school. I encounter them in everything from larger municipalities to small rural and sparsely populated municipalities. They go by slightly different names and are structured in slightly different ways, but they all have one thing in common: to give all children better opportunities to take part in Swedish cultural life and the sense of community that exists in practicing culture and sharing cultural experiences.

However, it should not matter which municipality you live in or what economy your school has. We therefore want to see a state-funded culture guarantee where all children are guaranteed to continuously experience professional art and their own creation through schooling, both in the school's premises and on-site at cultural institutions. This could, for example, involve school cinema, performing arts, own creation, or visits to museums.

We see this as a further development of the current system with Skapande skola. But 70 percent is not 100 percent. We want to find a system that reaches 100 percent and is a guarantee for the children. It is a clear direction of will, and it is a priority. To initiate the work with the implementation, we Social Democrats proposed 300 million under a new appropriation in the state budget. That proposal fell in the vote, but our hope is to find a broad consensus moving forward in the chamber regarding this issue.

Madam Speaker! Finally, the cultural school is also addressed in this report. We believe that it should be available on equal terms throughout the country. We therefore propose that the question of a cultural school act be investigated. This would provide the cultural school with a national framework and emphasize the cultural school's importance for the development of children and young people and its role in the artistic education chain in Sweden. Such legislation should be designed as a framework act similar to the library act and the museum act. In such an investigation, we also believe that questions regarding, for example, the cultural school's competence supply and the future availability of trained cultural school teachers should be included. We also proposed in the budget that the state development grant to the cultural school should be increased and amount to 200 million for next year.

(Applause)

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Madam Speaker! Kristoffer Lindberg is talking about the cultural cooperation model. It is a very much-debated model that was intended to be good. But it entailed a lot of administration and more coordination of priorities and what should be funded there. What does the state do? What does the region do? What does culture do? We do not want it to be that way.

We wanted an investigation to see how it can be simplified and made to work in a better way. That was the idea. We have not found those simplifications yet, so the matter is still being prepared. Sometimes it can take a long time when something is to be prepared so that it becomes good. My question is how the member thinks this should be simplified. Now it is very complicated, and then it is not something facilitating but rather a complicating.

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

Kristoffer Lindberg (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the question.

Several of the proposals that the Culture Council has submitted are perhaps more at the level of regulatory letters in the adaptation. I believe that several of them are good, for example when it comes to having different cooperation forums for the parts that are included in the cooperation model and for those who are perhaps outside but who still concern regional culture.

In general, the discussion about the cultural cooperation model and additional cultural areas that should be included is interesting. I believe that we need to take this seriously. The problem is that if the model is to be expanded to include more areas, it cannot be done without us adding more resources. This is, in many respects, a system where the state is involved in financing the regional cultural institutions.

The problem, as I see it, is that the state has over time reduced its share in the cultural cooperation model, which means that municipalities and regions are constantly having to compensate. This has been going on for a long time. I believe that we in this chamber need to take responsibility for reversing that development, especially in a situation where there is a crisis in healthcare and municipalities are on their knees because they have received smaller state grants. In that case, it is difficult to prioritize further compensating for the state's reduced commitments. I believe that we have a common responsibility to take.

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank Kristoffer Lindberg for the answer, even if it perhaps was not so clear. But we shall have to discuss this further.

One does not want to complicate things. One wants to find better solutions. Some parts that are good can remain, but we probably have to prepare it further. We are still spending 1.6 billion on the cultural cooperation model.

The government also entered into Skapande skola, which is a bourgeois initiative. We invest a lot of money there. Now, it is actually 900,000 students, i.e., 70 percent, who are reached by Skapande skola. What is prioritized there is that cultural organizers come out into the school so that all students are met by this. It is not something they need to seek out, but they come there. It creates jobs and ensures that the youth encounter culture. I ask myself why one wants to change that. It certainly has not reached 100 percent, which is obviously the goal. But why does S want to create a new model?

We think that this is a good, functioning model. It can be expanded, but it already provides students with cultural experiences and gives the cultural organizers work. Does one imagine that it can be done even better because one wants to start over again? I believe it is unnecessary to start over with something that is already underway and working well.

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

Kristoffer Lindberg (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for the question! One should probably not see it as a matter of starting over with something. I would prefer to see this as a development of the idea of Skapande skola and that one builds further on it.

The funds for Skapande skola are voluntary for schools to apply for. A national cultural guarantee instead implies a model where all children and pupils in preschool and primary school in Sweden are guaranteed to continuously experience professional performing arts and their own creation during their school time. We want to develop Skapande skola into a national cultural guarantee. I hope that the political dividing lines are not so sharp when it comes to this. I have a hope that one can reach an agreement in the chamber on just this.

That member, the government, and the Sweden Democrats completely miss that when the current policy forces regional cultural institutions to make cuts, it is as if one is sawing off the branch that is the regional culture's infrastructure. It obviously affects the possibility of both the Creative School and a future cultural guarantee. Schools will not be able to purchase that theater performance that cannot be produced. They cannot visit that museum that has been forced to close or listen to that symphony orchestra that has been laid off. That is what we are talking about.

The cultural infrastructure is interconnected and must extend beyond Stockholm's inner city or Gothenburg's inner city. Unfortunately, we currently have a government that completely lacks the ability to realize this.

(Applause)

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

Pia Trollehjelm (SD)

Madam Speaker! I want to begin by moving for the approval of the proposal in the committee report. This report concerns access to culture, and part of it concerns children's right to culture and the municipal culture school. The report states that children's and young people's right to culture shall be given special attention. This is part of the national cultural policy goals and is firmly anchored in the Convention on the Rights of the Child. It is an important and obvious starting point, we in the Sweden Democrats believe.

There are already several good initiatives such as Skapande skola, the fritidskortet – which was recently introduced and is now beginning to show effects – and the state development grant to the culture school. The overall assessment is that they are important tools to strengthen children's access to culture. The Sweden Democrats share that assessment.

Children's right to culture is not just about access in theory. It is about a real opportunity to participate, to play an instrument, to stand on a stage, or to create with one's own hands and own imagination. For some children, this is a leisure activity. For others, it is a crucial path into community, self-esteem, and faith in the future.

The report shows that children's cultural habits differ depending on background and place of residence. Equality is therefore not a given. It is crucial that the state supports are used accurately so that the barriers are lowered where they are needed most.

Madam Speaker! When it comes to the municipal culture school, the distribution of responsibility is clear. The culture school is a municipal matter. We Sverigedemokrater guard municipal self-government. The municipalities are those who know their local conditions best. At the same time, the state has an important role to support, coordinate, and follow up, especially when the differences risk becoming large between the municipalities.

The state development grant is therefore significant, but it must be used with clear follow-up where the focus is on quality and accessibility with the ambition to keep the fees reasonable. The money must reach the operations and the children.

The referral also addresses the proposal for a cultural guarantee, a good basic idea that the Sweden Democrats are also interested in. The committee's assessment is that the existing measures are sufficient at the current time. We share that assessment. At the same time, we are prepared to analyze how a model can contribute to further strengthening equality in a Swedish context to ensure that children, regardless of postcode, are able to encounter culture.

In conclusion, Madam Speaker: In a time when resources must be prioritized, it is a self-evident matter for us that children's and youth culture must stand strong. Adult cultural creators can, to a large extent, stand on their own feet, but children cannot. We want to secure the future for culture, the future's creative power, and the future's cohesion. For that, we need to lay the foundation in the children.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 4 March.)

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