(cont. from § 8) Fundamentals of education (cont. UbU10)

Paula Örn (S)

Madam Speaker! It was not exactly a surprise that the mother tongue would be the subject of today's debate.

Swedish mother tongue instruction must be described as a great success with benefits such as a more secure cultural identity, strengthened linguistic ability but above all, and most importantly, better knowledge results in other subjects, also in the subject Swedish. One of the larger studies was conducted in 2019 and included as many as 26,500 students. In a government investigation from the same year, there are an additional 95 scientific references. The Sweden Democrats' smokescreens about there being no research on the benefits of the mother tongue are just nonsense and an attempt to dodge the issues.

In the same way, they do otherwise in the climate area. They give a single researcher or an article the same weight as the entire UN climate panel IPCC with hundreds of researchers and thousands of scientific studies and publications.

It was already noted last year that it states in the Danish report on mother tongues that the member referred to that the results are not statistically significant and that the report cannot be used for decisions.

There are very many articles and researchers who repeatedly establish the scientific support that exists for the benefits of mother tongue instruction. We know that mother tongue instruction leads to better school results. Why do the Sweden Democrats continue to persist that there is a lack of research support for the positive effects of mother tongue instruction when it simply is not true?

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Madam Speaker! Of course, one can stand here and claim that mother tongue instruction is something absolutely fantastic, but the largest study is the one that was conducted in reality. It was conducted in our neighboring country Denmark, and it was not some small study that was not statistically validated. This was a large study where everyone was controlled. It was indeed conducted some years ago, but they looked at all students to see if the mother tongue instruction had any effect. It had neither any positive nor negative impact; instead, one saw that it was a zero-sum game, plus minus zero.

However, there was naturally a cost, and this cost is something the Social Democrats and other parties avoid talking about. It also gives a picture of what one considers most important: the Swedish language or the mother tongue. That is what one avoids talking about.

The Danes did completely right. They followed the conclusion because they saw that the mother tongue instruction had no significant positive impact; it was a zero-sum game. They therefore removed it county by county, as it is called there in Denmark - there are ten of them. Last was Copenhagen. Thus, they abolished it everywhere. It is completely voluntary, and that is exactly how we could have it in Sweden.

It can be voluntary to provide mother tongue instruction, but today it is a requirement. Every municipality must provide an opportunity for mother tongue instruction, under certain premises. We think that is wrong. This is a cost, and we want to spend the money on something else. Furthermore, we want a clear goal that it is Swedish that applies.

I do not know if the member has followed the reporting on the Pisa and Pirls studies. It is clearly shown there that students have enormous problems with the Swedish language. This is what we want to do something about. This is a small measure, and much more is required, which we are aware of.

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

Paula Örn (S)

Madam Speaker! It is still good that the member proves my thesis by referring to a study. In the study itself, it also states that the investigator considers that the underlying material cannot be used in the way it has been. In some way, this is still clarifying.

I want to return to a question that was raised during the debate we had last year on the occasion of a report on the same subject. At that time, the committee chairman Fredrik Malm said, namely, that there was nothing in the Tidö Agreement that said mother tongue instruction would be harmful. That is good, but it runs contrary to what the Sverigedemokraterna member claims, that is, that it is harmful and should be removed.

Furthermore, the committee chairman said roughly that there were things to look at for an investigation, but he was not particularly worried about the investigation. The concern he referred to was the concern that my colleague Aylin Nouri expressed that the government, led by the Sverigedemokraterna, will dismantle and remove Swedish mother tongue education.

One wonders a bit now how it will turn out. Is the mother tongue instruction protected, as the committee chairman says? Will the government led by SD cut back on the mother tongue instruction, as the Sverigedemokraterna want? Or is there nothing to worry about, as the Liberalerna say? I would be grateful for a clarification from the member.

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Madam Speaker! I can start from the end. Should one be worried? I do not know. I am not worried in any case. I and my party want that mother tongue instruction as a mandatory element should be abolished. We prevent no one from attending mother tongue instruction. We have never done that. We prevent no one from playing football. We also prevent no one from going and dancing, if one prefers that. Absolutely not! But we do not want this to be part of the school's mission. It is this we are against. If others then have a different opinion, they are welcome to have it.

An investigation must be conducted regardless, where this is included. Then we will see where we land. I cannot say that now, but the investigation must show that.

Is it harmful to attend mother tongue instruction? No, I do not think it is harmful. I have never said that. I do not like it when others put words in my mouth, Madam Speaker. I have never said that this is harmful. But we do not see that it is a plus.

It is not a small study from Denmark that we are following; several different studies have been conducted in Denmark. They did this large reality check, where they controlled everything, and it was quite a few years ago. It is not any study from last year. This, we claim, is a clear piece of evidence. We want to see a clear focus on that students in the Swedish school should become good at Swedish.

We have an extreme problem, Madam Speaker. I wonder if the member in front of me has discovered and seen that we have a huge problem in school with the Swedish language. We must have full focus on it. For us, this is a clear direction. Swedish is what provides education and then jobs or further education. Swedish is number one in priority.

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

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! There is about one month left until Sweden's students get their summer break, and many children have different activities, adventures, and holidays that they look forward to. But many students also have something even stronger that they long to escape from. For far too many students, school means an everyday life that involves worry and insecurity and where they cannot feel at home.

The annual mapping from Friends shows that almost every other student in middle school has been subjected to harassment in school during the past year. 14 percent report that they have been subjected to bullying. These are reports that unfortunately look quite similar year after year. More than one in ten students feel unsafe in school. Over half of the students state that other students disturb the order in the classroom, so that they cannot work in peace and quiet.

These public order problems, with violence, rowdiness, and harassment, naturally create enormous stress that causes children and young people to suffer and fall behind. Being subjected to bullying as a child can also have far-reaching consequences for health in adult life and can lead to low self-esteem, depression, anxiety, mental ill-health, or self-harming behavior. The public order problems in Swedish schools are a great betrayal.

Particularly serious are the figures showing that nearly half of the upper secondary school students experience that teachers or school staff do not always act when they are offended or treated poorly. We Christian Democrats can never accept that adults passively watch when students are offended or when rowdiness spreads in our schools. The school must never capitulate to those who choose to disturb, sabotage, and harass instead of treating others with respect.

Madam Speaker! No parent should have to send their little son or daughter to school with worry in their stomach over what the other children will do or say, and no child should have to feel unsafe in school and its corridors. The least a parent should be able to demand is that the school is a safe place where students treat each other with respect. What is needed now is a school policy for order, safety, and respect.

How then does one create that, Madam Speaker? I believe that more time is needed for the children. I believe that we need to create conditions for smaller teaching groups, better support for the students, more special teachers, and more special educators. In that way, we want to better adapt the teaching to the individual student's circumstances, so that more children get the opportunity to succeed in school. I believe that would create conditions for safe schools, but I also believe conversely that safe schools would create conditions for more time for the children. Those go hand in hand.

We also need to ensure that teachers and other school staff are ready to intervene against bullying and harassment. The anti-bullying programs that exist in schools must be evidence-based, but more training in leadership and conflict management is also needed, both in teacher education and as continuing education. School staff also need the authority to intervene against students who disturb the order. The powers that school staff have need to be clarified and strengthened.

Today, there is some possibility of expulsion, suspension, temporary relocation, and suspension, but those measures need to be able to be used to a greater extent. We believe that a larger battery of disciplinary measures should be able to be deployed against students who choose to threaten, violate, or sabotage instead of treating other students with respect.

The Christian Democrats' work for more order and safety will stubbornly continue until there is zero tolerance for bullying and harassment in Swedish schools. Every case of harassment and bullying needs to have clear consequences, and that kind of behavior should naturally also lead to direct contact between home and school.

Schooling actually takes place together with the parents. The importance of parents involving themselves and caring about the children's results in school cannot be overemphasized. Parents therefore need to receive support and help to take their parental responsibility, help their children to meet the school's requirements, and be more actively involved in the children's learning.

I spoke this weekend with a teacher who said that if all parents just ensured that the children slept at night and ate breakfast in the morning, a great deal would be solved in Swedish schools. One might think it is quite fundamental, but the statement says something about the fact that there are quite a few families where that is not a given.

I believe that something as simple as a statement of expectations could contribute - a kind of responsibility contract between student, parents, and school that clarifies the expectations of the student regarding the school's rules of conduct, the treatment of others, and naturally also the studies themselves, but which also clarifies what the parents can concretely do to support their children and raise the knowledge results. The school can do a lot on its own, but a strong parental responsibility is absolutely crucial for us to succeed in improving the knowledge results and making Sweden's schools into safe schools where no one is held back, where no one is left behind, and where all children are treated with respect.

I vote in favor of the proposal in the report.

(Applause)

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

Daniel Riazat (V)

Madam Speaker! I move for approval of reservation 19 from S, V and MP.

Madam Speaker! We are debating a report that contains a large mixture of different school issues. I intend to focus on two of the issues that I consider particularly important in the time we are in, as forces dealing with disinformation, hate, threats, and troll factories constitute a threat to our democracy. The school's task has rarely been more important regarding the democratic mission.

During my first year in the Riksdag, I raised an issue that has once again become relevant: Should political parties and youth organizations be allowed to be at schools or not?

Let me begin by saying that all students should be able to feel safe when they go to school. No Jewish, Muslim, or homosexual children should have to go to school and be met by political forces that violate their human dignity or question their existence.

Over the last 15 years, the debate on whether political organizations and parties—and if so, which ones—should be granted access to Sweden's schools has become a hot topic. Before the 2014 and 2018 elections, many parties and trade union organizations clearly criticized that, for example, Nazi organizations or parties have been allowed to spread their messages in schools—messages that violate the school's mission and laws. In a time when neo-Nazis with troll factories are involved in governing our country, it is time once again to raise the question.

Madam Speaker! One must be able to hold several thoughts in one's head at the same time. Engaging more young people in party politics is an important part of increasing the influence of young people in society. The school, just like the political parties, has an important democratic mandate and should therefore help youth organizations reach out to the youth. That is not how it looks in all places today, however. A provision in the Education Act makes it possible for principals to decide whether political parties should be invited or not. In the Education Act, it is described that the principal's decision shall be motivated from an objective selection as well as that it shall be made in a factual and impartial manner that does not conflict with the principle of objectivity.

Having an objective selection is very good and important for impartiality. We also consider it necessary for democracy that political parties shall be allowed to spread information in schools in an orderly manner.

When some of the principals choose not to accept parties or youth organizations because of some single party breaking the values found in the school, it harms democracy and the opportunity for young people to actually find out what the different parties want.

Speaking of having two thoughts in your head at the same time, the school is also not a public place. That is why it is unreasonable to let in parties that, through their policies, discriminate against a large part of Sweden's students.

Madam Speaker! I would like to use that to make a transition to another issue which I find incredibly important. It concerns the ability to distinguish between facts and opinions, and to distinguish between democratic values and undemocratic ones.

It is about the ability to be able to put into words what one thinks and feels, and the ability to be able to work with politics without, for example, spreading false information about political opponents through troll factories. Therefore, I want to talk about school libraries and all children's right to staffed ones.

School libraries are important for learning and for access to, among other things, literature, teaching materials, and digital resources. It should be based on that they should be staffed with qualified personnel in order to contribute to equality. They also contribute to children becoming better at self-criticism, being nurtured to become democratic citizens who have the ability to analyze and simply participate in and develop our democracy instead of fighting to counteract democracy.

The previous government invested in staffing reinforcements in school libraries, and through Läslyftet, school librarians have also been given opportunities for professional development. The issue has also been incorporated into the curricula.

Today, however, we see a regression. Access to purposeful school libraries has become more unequal. Some schools have staffed school libraries and good access to learning materials, while others, often profit-driven independent schools, save on resources by reducing access to learning materials and school libraries.

The pursuit of profit and market logic have created incentives for school corporations to cut back on exactly such parts as school libraries. Alongside a ban on profit extraction in schools for the market actors' corporations, clear regulations for school libraries are required so that these profit-driven schools cannot cut back on the important thing we have, namely the school libraries.

We from S, V and MP want, in the reservation we have today, to particularly highlight proposals in the investigation School Libraries for Education and Training that could be implemented. It needs to be regulated what constitutes a school library. It shall be a common and organized resource with an offering of both digital and analog media characterized by versatility and quality, and which shall be placed at the disposal of students and teachers.

The investigation proposes, among other things, that it should be clarified in the Education Act that the purpose of school libraries is to promote students' reading and media and information literacy. It was for reasons including this that I raised this issue.

We must ensure that we invest in making sure that the primary bodies strive, in the first instance, to employ staff who are qualified to be school librarians and who have knowledge in library and information science. It also increases the probability that our children will receive sufficient tools to be self-critical and learn the difference between what are democratic values and what are undemocratic ones. We simply mean that the government should take measures in accordance with what I have stated here.

Madam Speaker! According to the government's list of bills for the spring of 2024, it appears that the government is to submit a bill regarding school libraries on June 4. Now the Riksdag has the chance to send a clear signal to the government so that this bill does not become like it did last time when Jan Björklund was in power.

Instead, it is a matter of introducing the necessary parts needed so that we get exactly staffed school libraries in an equal school system. It contributes to children and students, unlike some parties, learning what is fact and what is disinformation.

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

Anna Lasses (C)

Madam Speaker! Do you remember your first grade? Perhaps it was with a mixture of fear and delight, a little nausea and stomach ache, but still with anticipation? Would all the effort one had put in pay off? Or was it, as for many today, just the start of a long nightmare of anxiety?

You are not good enough! That is what we practically say to a quarter of all students. Because there are so many who leave school with a failing grade, F, in at least one subject. This applies particularly to the 15 percent who fail in a core subject and are therefore shut out from large parts of upper secondary school.

The future is being transformed and is becoming anything but bright. It is being closed off. It feels as if dreams of travel, exciting jobs, and being able to build a family are gone. I might as well dream myself away into a digital world, or achieve success in the underworld among criminals where I can gain respect. Here, anyway, nobody cares.

A quarter of the fine, beloved, expectant children we sent off as six-year-olds are broken, stressed, and shattered nine years later. How can this be allowed to continue?

Much, or rather most of it, is due to the fact that we have a distorted and deficient resource distribution. There is a lack of support for students with needs. But we must not turn a blind eye to the fact that grades play a small, but still so irritatingly itching role in this.

The most bizarre thing about today's grading system is that the threshold for passing has requirements that not all students can achieve, i.e., not even if they try. As it stands now, we are saying in plain terms that these children do not meet society's requirements for what a human is expected to be, which simply testifies to a very sick grading system that needs urgent care.

At the same time, we have a very solid and fine Education Act which states that all children have the right to education and have the right to pass in school.

We in the Center Party have been clear. The criteria for pass, also called grade E, must be weighted, just as A to D are, and above all, realistic with goals that all students actually have the possibility to achieve if they put in time and effort to try.

That is why it is both good and necessary that this is investigated now. But it is not enough. We also need to review the grade F, that is, fail, to see what function that grade serves and if and when it should be used in that case. It could even be that the most sensible thing is to abolish it. We simply should not release youths from school who are not considered passed.

It is not about a "flumskola" and that the requirements should be reduced. On the contrary, a good school is characterized by high expectations. Research clearly shows that high expectations are crucial for all students' learning outcomes, regardless of background, gender, or disability.

Students who risk not reaching the knowledge goals must receive the right support as early as possible. Requirements and expectations must not be lowered. But more opportunities must be opened up for children to move forward in life. Every individual's life journey looks different and proceeds at different paces; some need more time. It must never be too late to get on the right track.

If we are to look at it bluntly, it is precisely grades - as opposed to acquired knowledge - that are very much about being a way to distribute upper secondary school and higher education places in an efficient and legally secure manner. In that case, the total number of credits is decisive - not that we have condemned young people with the letter F for the rest of their lives. Therefore, I want to move for approval of our reservation number 17, which, among other things, is about investigating the grade F. That is all I have to say about the grades.

Now, Madam Speaker, I would like to turn my gaze toward the part of school that is most often forgotten: our after-school centers. If school is the place where we receive factual knowledge and education, it is during breaks, at after-school centers, and in our associations that we become participants in society. Here we form relationships and networks, and here we learn social interaction, norms, and values. A large part of language development also takes place at the after-school centers.

In this activity, which, unlike school, is designed based on the children's interests and needs, the children are met by adult educators who can mentor and develop them as human beings rather than focusing on results and grades. That is the idea, at least. The after-school centers are an incredibly underrated and deprioritized activity. Hand on heart - many of us who have sat as municipal politicians can probably admit that we have nibbled away at the after-school center when the budget has been difficult to put together.

In a time when society is divided and exclusion is beginning to show its consequences seriously, we should do exactly the opposite. If we really want to build a society where everyone keeps up, the after-school center is a great place to start. It is also a matter of ensuring that all children have the opportunity to attend the after-school center. In total, 85 percent of all 6-9-year-olds are enrolled in the after-school center. But in areas of exclusion, it is only 68 percent, even though it is precisely here that the after-school center is needed most.

It is also the case that children of parents on parental leave and of the unemployed do not have the right to after-school care. This naturally contributes to exclusion and inequality and is furthermore an obstacle to integration. The Center Party therefore wants to increase the right to after-school care, and we propose that all children in grades 1-3, including children of the unemployed and of parents on parental leave, shall have the right to ten hours of free after-school care per week. This is also in line with the proposals that have emerged in both investigations conducted on after-school care and the importance of leisure time, which the committee refers to in its response.

It is good that this is being prepared within the Government Offices. It would be even better if there were some action, especially considering that we have a government that says it wants to fight against crime and social exclusion. This is an excellent way to prevent exactly that.

I do, however, admit that my confidence in the government base on the issue is quite exhausted, not least after the debate we had about preschool a few weeks ago. There, the Sweden Democrats clearly signaled that they believe preschool should only be for children whose parents work, completely without seeing the connection between cause and effect. Preschool, free time activities, and association life are things that reduce exclusion and prevent crime. Then perhaps children who risk exclusion should also truly be given the chance.

With this said, it is important that we listen to the increasingly desperate chorus of leisure educators who point out that the situation is unsustainable. When the belt is tightened and the school has to pay, it is often precisely the after-school center that is cut first. It is an activity that is already strained, and the density of educators is unreasonably low in many places.

We in the Center Party have been clear that resources for children's education must increase, not least in our budget. But we also need to help each other ensure that the after-school centers truly receive a share of this. Much is skewed in the government basis's handling of school, preschool, and after-school centers. Focus is placed on things that sound good: on books and on banning screens and mobile phones. This is done at the same time as schools and preschools are being closed at a rapid pace, educators are being dismissed, and exclusion is increasing.

Children's education, that is school, preschool, and after-school care, is the foundation of a democratic society. It is here that we are to build trust and participation. It is more important than ever in today's Sweden, where the consequences of exclusion with shootings, children coming to school hungry, and increased inequalities are now exposed completely openly.

It is not enough to talk. If we are serious about what is stated in our school law, resources must increase significantly but also be redistributed so that they are available where they are needed. This is what the government should devote itself to, together with those who are ready to roll up their sleeves, instead of clinging to the CEO of the troll factory and his army.

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

Camilla Hansén (MP)

Madam Speaker! Today we address education issues from a broad perspective, and that is what we in the Green Party have also done in the drafting of the motions. Our proposals concern democracy assignments, gender pedagogy, media and information literacy, increased knowledge of nature, outdoor life and the right of public access, mother tongues and minority languages. As you know, a good portion of the motions are presented in a simplified form, but this is nevertheless the party's policy.

But school is so much more than that. It is an activity where hundreds of thousands of children, students, teachers, and many other professional groups work every day. Miljöpartiet wants to highlight some specific areas there, and we want to safeguard and elevate the knowledge of children and students.

Madam Speaker! Our society and the world are changing rapidly, and it is clear that the values upon which our society rests - freedom and democracy - need to be strengthened and protected. The democratic mission in the education system is strong and clear. A living democracy requires participation, which means that teaching about basic democratic values is not sufficient. Education must also be conducted in democratic forms of work.

Children and students need tools to be active citizens in a democracy, and students who have real influence over their education gain experience in making their voices heard, influencing, and making decisions. These are experiences that give young people a greater opportunity to influence their lives here and now and as adults.

We are now in the middle of an election campaign, and as several others have pointed out, it is becoming apparent that schools need to get better at working with the democracy mandate in practice linked to the political parties. We hear about several youth organizations that are not allowed to come to schools or that are allowed to come to schools and have book tables but preferably not talk politics. If one as a Member of Parliament asks questions about study visits and other things or seeks contact, it may happen that one is told that it is only the head of administration who speaks with politicians.

School is publicly funded, and it is governed by elected officials, but elected officials do not feel welcome. I think this is problematic. It becomes difficult to teach how a democracy works in practice if students are not allowed to meet elected officials.

Miljöpartiet wants the proposal from the Committee Democracy 100 years regarding the school's democracy mission to be implemented. This means that Skolverket shall be tasked with designing recommendations, general advice, and inspiration material for democracy work in schools. It should be said that a great deal of work is already being done regarding democracy issues at Skolverket. The Committee's assessment is that Skolverket should evaluate the consequences of political representatives now increasingly rarely being invited to schools.

Madam Speaker! We want the mission to teach media and information literacy to be strengthened in the primary school and upper secondary school curricula. When most people, not least young people but at all ages, spend a lot of time in the digital environment and are exposed to a flood of different messages, the ability to critically analyze information and different sources is more important than ever. Without such an ability, the vulnerability to being exposed to propaganda, inaccuracies, and distorted messages of various kinds increases. Those who lack the ability to distinguish truth from falsehood or cannot put information into context may find it harder to build a solid knowledge. This also increases the risk that anti-democratic messages gain traction. Therefore, it is so important that media and information literacy is strengthened in school.

Not least, the revelations, reactions, and debate of the past few days regarding how parties run disinformation centers in social media show what we all, children and adults, are exposed to and need to be able to handle.

Madam Speaker! In light of the global megatrends and what the world's countries have agreed upon in Agenda 2030, it is clear that those who today are children, pupils and students need to develop a competence for action for sustainable development.

The school system's mission is clear, and the work of increasing awareness of the generational goal – to hand over a society to the next generation where the major environmental problems are solved – is of utmost importance so that children and young people will be strongly equipped to live in and lead a society that is to achieve the overall generational goal.

The environmental perspective is clear in the school's governing documents. In practice, work is also carried out with the broader concept of sustainability as a perspective. Miljöpartiet wants it to become even clearer in the school system's mandate, which means that education in all school forms for children, pupils, and adults shall have sustainable development with the dimensions of social, economic, and ecological sustainability as a fundamental perspective, just as it is now for children in preschool.

Naturskyddsföreningens report "How is the school keeping up with the transition?", the third in the series of their reports, shows an improvement. It also shows that there is a clear mandate for the school but that the implementation needs to increase the pace. For example, only six out of ten municipalities state that they have specific initiatives for the work with sustainable development in primary school. The majority of the municipalities also do not allocate specific funds for competence development for primary school teachers or school leaders when it comes to sustainable development.

For Miljöpartiet, the love of nature is important. We believe that the more one knows about nature, the more one is prepared to do to protect it. Ignorance should not be the basis for species being threatened and becoming extinct. All children and young people should be given the opportunity to learn the most common birds, trees, and flowers in their country. All municipalities in Sweden should ensure that there is a youth activity focused on nature and outdoor life.

We live in a species crisis. It is called the sixth mass extinction. The decline of species occurs largely in silence. Through increased knowledge of nature, a greater understanding is created of the values that are now at stake. Knowledge of nature is an important part of the curriculum, from preschool to primary school, and there is great value in that knowledge of nature and biodiversity is included and expanded in the curriculum for all school levels. Therefore, knowledge of species and species protection need to be a natural part of the teaching. Here, outdoor life in school and knowledge of the right of public access also play a large role.

Fundamentals of education

Madam Speaker! Others have already spoken about this in a constructive manner, but I want to point out that the Green Party also looks forward with great anticipation to the government's bill regarding staffed school libraries, which is to be submitted before the summer. It is a self-evident matter that there should be well-staffed and well-equipped school libraries that all students have access to.

Madam Speaker! I want to conclude by reminding what is truly fundamental about education. It is skilled teachers who have time for their students. This requires that the state takes a greater responsibility for the school's funding but leaves the details of the implementation of the teaching to the classrooms and those who work in them. Here, the government is instead taking a path of some kind of popcorn politics of detailed measures such as mobile phone bans and other things, instead of providing the funding that could be provided.

One can choose to do as the government does. However, it is important to know that there are other choices to be made. One can choose to ensure that the school receives sufficient funding, that it gets what it needs and is not put on a starvation diet.

The Green Party makes a different choice than the government. We strengthen the schools' finances, and we hand over the activities in the classroom to the professionals: the teachers.

Madam Speaker! I move for approval of reservation 14, which concerns strengthening the school's work with learning for sustainable development.

(Applause)

In this speech, Ulrika Westerlund (MP) agreed.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 16 May.)

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