(cont. from prot. 42) Education and university research (cont. UbU1)

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! The Christian Democrats are working for a school where no one is held back and no one is left behind. We want to emphasize the importance of a school that has high expectations for both students and staff - a school that meets every student's challenges with faith in the student's potential to succeed.

The statistics are very clear. Students who leave school with passing grades have, in long-term follow-ups, significantly better finances and physical and mental health, as well as a lower degree of social exclusion and crime. Completing school is therefore one of the absolutely most important factors for not ending up excluded from society later in life. Given this, it is very serious that almost a quarter of students today leave primary school without complete grades. If the school does not succeed in its mission, future problems are created for the young people but also for Sweden as a country.

Mr. Speaker! A fundamental prerequisite for students to be able to acquire knowledge in school is that they feel comfortable and are doing well. In this regard, student health is, among other things, an important part. Many students can testify to how contact with student health was a first step on the journey toward feeling well, while at the same time many students can also testify that they have taken the courage to reach out a hand but were met by an absence note on the school counselor's door.

The government's announced priorities within the field of student health are therefore very welcome, as is the work currently underway to strengthen cooperation between student health, health and medical care, and social services so that more children and young people receive early and coordinated interventions.

But if students are to feel comfortable and well in school, it is also fundamental that they themselves have been given the choice of which school they want to attend. The public sector must offer parents and students the opportunity to freely choose a school that fits and opt out of one that does not work.

The Christian Democrats stand up for every student's right to choose a school, regardless of whether one chooses an independent, a municipal, or even a confessional school. Voices are sometimes raised to ban a certain type of school just because individual school owners do not behave. The Christian Democrats are, however, happy to say that this government has no such plans.

The students who attend confessional schools that follow the Education Act, the curriculum and the school's values, and perhaps additionally achieve both good study habits and good academic results can be reassured, as the threat to the confessional schools is averted. This government is positive towards everyone who contributes positively to our school system.

On the other hand, we are just as clear that schools that do not follow the Education Act and the curriculum shall be met with inspection, action plan, follow-up, and ultimately withdrawal of permit. Therefore, it is good that the Swedish Schools Inspectorate is provided with funds to continue its important work.

Mr. Speaker! Students who are struggling in school find it even tougher if there is no peace to work in during lessons or safety in the corridors. Unfortunately, this is the reality in many schools today. Far too many students carry not only their backpacks on the way to school but also a lump of anxiety in their stomachs for what will be shouted in the corridor today or for who will deliver a shove at the locker. It occurs that teachers cannot carry out the teaching due to disruption in the classroom, and it even occurs that teachers are threatened by students.

Without a fundamental ethics, a society is created where the strong rule and the weak suffer. The school's values, with norms such as the unique and inviolable value of all human beings and solidarity with the vulnerable, have a deep anchoring in Judeo-Christian ethics and in Western humanism. The school's responsibility is to anchor these values in the students by translating the ethical principles into practical action in the work against bullying and disruption and, in that regard, also against vandalism.

In this work, the establishment of social teams can play an important role. They can contribute to safety and study, increase presence for the students, and improve cooperation between school and social services. Additionally, teachers get the opportunity to spend the time focusing on teaching instead of managing disciplinary issues.

Studying is important for all students to succeed in school, but every student also needs to receive help from the educators to reach their full potential. It is not stigmatizing to receive special education support. On the other hand, it is stigmatizing to not be able to read when even all of one's friends can.

Too many children unfortunately receive special education support very late in their schooling, with an emphasis on upper secondary school. This means that many have struggled for a long time. If we are to reverse that development, we must provide extra support and help early, before the problems have grown too large. In that case, more special education teachers are needed. Therefore, the government's initiative there is very important.

Mr. Speaker! The single most important factor for concentration in lessons and for the students' results is a skilled teacher. One of the school's major challenges is therefore to get the right people to seek out the teaching profession. In that case, the attractiveness of the profession must increase. This is done, for example, by letting teachers be teachers and by ensuring there is access to support and relief, such as social teams, special education teachers, and student health services.

It also needs to become easier for academics to transition to the teaching profession. Therefore, they need to be offered an attractive and effective complementary pedagogical education, because when the educational pathways become more efficient, more people will also choose to take that path.

Another way to reduce the teacher's workload is the government's investment in teaching materials. Physical books help the teacher avoid copying or producing their own stencils or searching for links to the extent that this needs to be done today. We have seen the development over the recent years. The school's digitalization costs have soared while the children's access to textbooks has plummeted. It affects the students, who do not get a coherent and overviewable picture when textbooks make room for links and apps. There are also studies that show that one learns better from reading in a physical book than on a tablet.

Mr. Speaker! When one speaks about students feeling well and acquiring knowledge, one must also mention the family. Parents are the most important people for a child. However compensatory we want the school to be, the family will always be decisive.

The importance of the family therefore needs to be recognized and parental responsibility must be re-established. The family must be able to trust that the school does everything it can so that the child receives the knowledge it needs, but the school also needs to be able to trust that the parents provide their child with the prerequisites to take school seriously and to treat other people with respect.

With this, Mr. Speaker, I move for approval of the committee's proposal. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank our committee chair, the committee members and the committee secretariat for the work during the year and wish you all and all of Sweden's teachers and educational staff a Merry Christmas.

(Applause)

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Mr. Speaker! I asked this question to the Moderates the day before yesterday. I thought I might perhaps get a better answer from the Christian Democrats' member here in the chamber. But this government is, after all, remote-controlled by the Sweden Democrats. This we can all be aware of.

We have now heard here that an incredibly large number of initiatives are to be made within the school sector, at the same time as SKR has announced that just to maintain today's levels in education and in the entire welfare system, 20 billion kronor must be added to municipalities and regions. That is what is required to be able to maintain today's levels in the welfare system.

This government has announced that it intends to increase the support to the municipalities by 6 billion kronor. By my way of calculating, there is then a shortage of approximately 14 billion to be able to maintain today's levels.

School is, above all, the responsibility of the municipalities. When the municipalities receive so little money as compensation to be able to maintain today's levels, how have the Christian Democrats envisioned that one can carry out all the fantastic initiatives that the member here at the rostrum has presented?

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

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Samuel Gonzalez Westling, for the question! This government is therefore adding 1.6 billion in investments in the education area specifically. These are investments in textbooks, after-school programs, special education teachers, social teams, and so on. It is the kind of thing that Vänsterpartiet does not put any targeted money into.

In total, this government is implementing initiatives of 12 billion in increased state grants, and also 5 billion of the electricity compensation support will also go to municipalities and regions. These are important funds that the municipalities will be able to use to run schools.

The targeted state grants for, for example, teaching materials are due to the fact that there is a great need for printed books where students can get a coherent picture of the teaching. There, one can get an overviewable picture that can be taken home to the parents, so that the parents can also in a simpler way take part in the children's schooling by seeing what they are working on, instead of getting a fragmented picture from links and apps. Physical teaching materials, where Sweden lags behind other successful countries in the school area, are an important investment.

The targeted funds that this government is adding, but which the Left Party does not want to specifically target towards learning materials, will make a difference for those students who are a bit weaker and need the most support. My counter-question is therefore why the Left Party does not want to prioritize learning materials in its budget in this way.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Mathias Bengtsson, for the non-existent answer, if I may say so.

I have experience as a municipal politician since twelve years ago, before I entered the Riksdag, so I am very aware of how municipalities prioritize. I come from a fairly small municipality, which I am aware that Member Bengtsson also does.

Vänsterpartiet allocates 33 billion to the municipalities, which is 13 billion more than what SKR has stated is needed to maintain today's levels. This means that 13 billion more could have been allocated to the development of welfare as a whole, and a large part of these funds would have gone to the school.

It is admittedly true that we are not making any targeted investments to the municipalities. The Christian Democrats are, as far as I know, for the municipalities to have responsibility for the school and that it is they who should run the school, not the Riksdag. The Left Party has a different opinion. But now we have the system we have, and then we shall live up to it. If the municipalities want to make these investments and have the competence to spend the money on what the municipalities are to do, then they shall also be able to do so.

It is interesting. The government could allocate even more money to the municipalities, but instead, they choose to lower the tax for those who earn the most. Those who earn over 50,000 kronor a month will thus receive tax cuts at a cost of 13 billion for the state. And then the member speaks about adding 1.9 billion to learning materials. Where are the proportions in this?

I do not quite understand how the government has reasoned when one thinks it is more important that those who earn the most in society should receive tax cuts. We here will receive a tax cut of up to 1,500 kronor a month, but the school will have to scale back and make cuts.

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

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the speech!

The government is therefore allocating 1.6 billion in investments in the education sector. These are important funds, a total of 12 billion in increased state grants.

Politics is about priorities. That we have an indexing that ensures not everyone pays state tax is something the Kristdemokraterna stand for. I think it is good that we have this indexing. Not everyone should pay state tax. With the Vänsterpartiet's policy, 1.3 million Swedes would get higher taxes. Three out of ten police officers, one out of four midwives, and many of Sweden's teachers would get higher taxes.

The Left's proposal always seems to be to provide more money by having people get less money in their pockets, but just injecting more money is, for me as a Christian Democrat, not to do the job fully. We need to provide more funds, and we do that in the budget. But one must also make the right investments.

We need to invest in a school with order and tidiness, with safety in the corridors and with focus during lessons, where mobiles are not present and causing distractions during lesson time and where the teacher is the one who is responsible for the focus and can take the disciplinary measures required to maintain the focus. Then we need these investments in teaching materials, in holiday schools, in special education teachers and in duty and emergency schools.

There, the Left Party fails to do the whole job, because simply throwing in money is not doing the whole job. Therefore, the Left Party will also never be able to solve the real problems of Swedish schools.

(Applause)

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

Mats Wiking (S)

Mr. Speaker! I want to begin by pointing out that the Social Democrats are not participating in the decision, but we refer to our own separate statement.

Now we are going to talk about higher education and research and leave primary school and preschool.

In Sweden, there is a unique opportunity to study in adult education, vocational colleges, colleges, and universities. The education is free of charge, and the Swedish model for student grants is based on the idea that everyone, regardless of the family's finances, should be able to study full-time. The Swedish model is further built on the idea that young people and adults should have the opportunity to further their education throughout their entire working lives. We call it lifelong learning, Mr. Speaker.

To even consider applying to a university or college requires that you dare to believe that another path is possible. For someone who has parents with low education and who perhaps themselves have only attended two years of high school, the step is large. In that case, you need support and help with motivation from others in your vicinity, for example a teacher at the high school who makes you believe that higher studies are possible for you too.

Mr. Speaker! When the college started its unified campus in Trollhättan in 2008, it became possible for young people from worker homes to begin a journey of learning. We Social Democrats have always said that lifelong learning is important. It is important not only for the individual but for the whole society.

Mr. Speaker! Education creates self-confidence in individuals who dare to seek new careers, perhaps start their own firm or become important welfare workers. That is why we Social Democrats have been keen to invest in education at times when the economy is pointing downwards and unemployment is increasing.

Not so long ago, we had a pandemic raging in the country, and it is still ongoing. At that time, the then Social Democratic and Green Party government presented a historic investment in welfare, in order to save the companies, the welfare, and the jobs.

Mr. Speaker! Now that we once again have a tough period with a recession and high electricity prices, we Social Democrats are once again ready to invest in adult education, in order to meet the educational needs that companies, municipalities, and regions are flagging.

We do the opposite of the government - a government that cuts the budget for adult education by 1.23 billion, a government that reduces the appropriations to the university colleges by 104 million, and a government that also reduces the appropriations to twelve colleges and universities and in practice also gives all other educational institutions austerity conditions by not making sufficient adjustments to cover price and wage increases.

Then we Social Democrats are prepared to do what is required. We do this by investing 1.4 billion more in adult education in the budget than the government does.

Mr. Speaker! At times when we need to step on the gas regarding education, the right-wing government and SD put on the brakes. When Education Minister Persson, in several debates, claims that the government is not making a cut to adult education but "only" a return to the situation before the pandemic, I wonder how the Education Minister's party, Liberalerna, will handle the fact that Sweden finds itself in a new vulnerable position given the recession and the risk of increased unemployment.

For us Social Democrats, it is obvious to meet unemployment by giving people the opportunity to further their education. That the transition study support has become such a success with over 22,000 applications, which we spoke about in the debate yesterday, shows that people who risk unemployment are wise and seek the support to further their education. What does the government say to the approximately 17,000 people who have applied for the transition study support but who are now receiving a no on their applications?

Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats want to promote high-quality research throughout the country. In the research bill from 2020, which was drafted under the previous S-led government, significant additions are made to both large and small educational institutions. The Riksdag then supported an overarching goal for research policy, namely that Sweden should be one of the world's leading research and innovation countries and a leading knowledge nation.

The Covid-19 pandemic demonstrates with all clarity the importance of research and knowledge. We know that the world will face new crises. Research and innovation are therefore required to meet the challenges of the future.

Mr. Speaker! In the research proposal, strategic investments were also made in high-quality research and innovation to increase cooperation in order to generate new knowledge and meet today's and tomorrow's major societal challenges.

Mr. Speaker! Unfortunately, we can discern a certain connection between the government's cuts to higher education and the view on research. When educational places disappear, there is a concern among the universities that support for research will also be reduced.

It would be interesting to hear the right-wing government and SD explain how the savings on colleges and universities benefit research and how they intend to carry out the excellent research that they say they want to have according to the Tidö Agreement. Is the purpose perhaps to cut back on research at our smaller colleges in order to redistribute resources to the universities? Here, the government owes an answer.

(Applause)

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Finally, we stand here. We began the debate on Monday and conclude it on Wednesday. As we have longed for.

I vote in favor of the committee's proposal in the report.

We stand behind this budget. But precisely in areas such as higher education and research, the different blocs do not differ that much budget-wise. I heard here earlier that the difference is marginal and has practically always been so. It is more about ideological dividing lines between the blocs, and this debate will well be accordingly.

I hope that during the mandate period there will be a number of long-awaited proposals with a focus primarily on more quality than quantity, which we have nagged so much about in this chamber. If I interpret the signals correctly, the government has this focus.

Why is it so important to invest in quality? Those who enter a program at our universities must have sufficient prior knowledge to complete the education. Otherwise, the universities have to lower the requirements, which has happened. After a period of time, the entire educational standard has been lowered, and the students find it difficult to get jobs. Companies require a certain degree of quality in the education. Above all, we fall behind internationally if other nations do not do the same. And many nations do not. Therefore, it is important to maintain the quality.

In the budget, space research receives an increased appropriation of 70 million kronor. This is welcome. One might think that it should be larger. But then one must take into account that space research has received increased appropriations in a number of budgets. This is important for us to be able to participate in international collaborations - in the Western world, the EU and Europe. It drives technological development, it drives competence, it stimulates the economy in Sweden and it is good for all of us, for the economy and for Sweden. It provides so-called spinoff effects. If I have understood the budget correctly, an expansion of Esrange is included in this investment.

We have unique conditions in Sweden to build Europe's leading launch site for satellites and other things. We have surfaces and areas that other nations are nowhere near having. We have a climate that the other nations do not have. I think we should invest in becoming the Western world's leading—aside from the USA, which we cannot compete with—launch site for satellites, a top-class launch base. It would increase Sweden's reputation within the EU and in the entire Western world.

Minister Mats Persson has launched an inquiry into cancel culture. I think that is very welcome. I did, however, hear a debate between Persson and a gender studies scholar from Lund University, and I cannot help but mention it. The gender studies scholar firmly claimed that such an inquiry is completely unnecessary. She argued that one fights this unhealthy culture themselves within academia if it even occurs at all. If it does not occur at all, an impartial and unbiased inquiry will show that. I think that all inquiries should be honest and unbiased. Now, that is not the case. But that is what I think anyway. Now, I believe it will turn out that this gender researcher is wrong.

We remember the debacle at Konstfack a while ago concerning the room Vita havet. And there are a number of other examples. But this is perhaps the most immediate.

By the way: A couple of weeks ago I heard that they had closed an entire institution at Lund University due to work environment problems. So, no, the academy cannot manage this entirely on its own even if that is the tradition, so to speak.

I wish Mats Persson good luck with the investigation.

It is also important that we address the abuse of residence permits for studies among foreign students. After a short time, they take simpler black market jobs, neglect their studies and move to another location. This concerns quite a few students but from a few countries. I will also mention that this is an important and welcome point in the Tidö Agreement. But this is a problem that should have been addressed a long time ago. This is not rocket science à la Esrange. This can be adjusted quite simply to reduce the abuse. We have experts for a reason, and they should simply do their jobs. We hope that the government takes action on this as soon as possible. No huge investigation was needed.

However, we must give foreign researchers reasonable opportunities to work in Sweden. I have understood that the processing times for residence permits are a major problem. Foreign researchers who want to conduct research in Sweden and have an employment at some university here should have a special fast track at Migrationsverket. It is not reasonable that they should stand in a queue like everyone else. These are people who are to have a time-limited employment. Their applications differ very much from the other applications. A fast track should actually be established at Migrationsverket.

A special law should also be enacted in the Aliens Act for researchers. And I must admit that I have changed my mind a little bit on this point. The paragraphs of the Aliens Act are simply not relevant for researchers and doctoral students. We must realize that. The legislation is only aimed at job seekers. There is no relevance for researchers and people who are going to work at a university. Now, a law should be enacted that cannot be abused by 2,000 people the week after it has entered into force. This must be possible to do.

However, we believe that the maintenance requirements for foreign researchers who conduct research in Sweden must remain. It is reasonable that one supports oneself and one's closest relatives. This applies to both researchers and everyone else. We assume that the government will take action on this problem as soon as possible and come up with adequate proposals. This is actually not rocket science either.

Of course, all activities within the higher education system must be based on a scientific foundation. It has been stated in the media that we, SD, would not support such a view. I am thinking specifically of one article. And it is a bit ridiculous that I should have to stand here and declare it. In this article, it was mentioned that we would not stand behind the theory of evolution. It is scientifically proven, and it is what science works from and should work from. I hope I was clear now.

Even that which is scientifically proven within climate science should be accepted as just the science that it is - of course. What we then do about the problems is another matter. It is a political question. These things must be distinguished, which is not always done. If we, for example, are to stop driving cars when the Chinese build a new coal power plant every week is a political question. I do not think so.

Mr. Speaker! In conclusion, I assume that climate science, gender studies, and the theory of evolution are conducted according to strict scientific principles or according to proven experience and common sense. I hope that we can all, regardless of party affiliation, agree on this.

Mr. Speaker! I shall say a few words about the debate rules that have been introduced. It is welcome that an effort is being made to vitalize the debates. But if we have a debate on Monday and end up finishing it on Wednesday, perhaps the debate rules still need to be reformed once more. I believe I know that it is Mr. Speaker himself who stands behind the debate rules. I do not know if it is true. But I personally think that these debate rules should be reconsidered.

With this, I wish everyone a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

(Applause)

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Mr. Speaker! Yes, now the Sweden Democrats have taken power in Sweden, and so far the disappointment is great in houses and huts - but perhaps not as much in the castles.

What do the Sweden Democrats choose to do when they get the chance to govern the country? Do they aim to strengthen society in the places where the party has grown the most, such as in my own home municipality, Hofors, where more than every fifth voter voted for the party in the last election? Can the people of Hofors and other residents in Sweden look forward to investments in, for example, schools that will make a noticeable difference? The answer to these questions is, of course, no. Instead, a gigantic tax cut is prioritized, which will benefit a very small number of, at the very least, the people of Hofors.

Schools, together with other welfare, shall receive a total of 6 billion according to the Sweden Democrats' and the government's budget. But those who earn the most in society - those who earn over 50,000 kronor a month - shall receive a total of 13 billion kronor. In what way is this a well-balanced prioritization, according to MP Stenkvist? And where does the MP believe that the 15,000 jobs that are now threatened by the government's budget should be removed?

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! We took power because the voters voted for us, quite simply. That is called democracy. The red bloc lost the election – by a fairly small margin, but still. We have, therefore, in no way taken power in the way one does in dictatorships.

When it comes to the government's initiatives for the school, we stand behind the budget. It contains an initiative of 6 extra billion. As Member Westling himself has said, Madam Speaker, it is the municipalities that have responsibility for the school. I was against the municipalization that Göran Persson pushed through, but now it is the municipalities that have responsibility. They receive 6 billion, and that is no small money in the real world outside these walls. It is people who work together those funds. It is a welcome contribution.

As a previous speaker said here, the Left Party tries to solve all problems with more money. I myself come from a rather poor municipality. It is not small, but it is a rather poor municipality. I see the need for something other than just more money.

A different pedagogy is required in schools, for the students' sake. It is not for our sake but for the students' sake; they need better guidance and a firmer grip. Teachers should be teachers, not friends with students, which is an opinion that I think many left-wing members express. It is for the students' and their learning's sake. It is nothing to laugh at, Samuel Gonzalez Westling. It is very serious, I think.

The tax cut is, as said, no tax cut, but it is an automatic adjustment due to inflation.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! I apologize for laughing, but the reason was somewhat that I did not receive a proper answer to my question.

It is still the case that the municipalities have the responsibility and that the school costs money. Society costs money to run, and the state's budget actually finances the municipalities' operations as well. That is why these calculations are made every year; it is required so that the municipalities can pay for the activities that the state has mandated the municipalities to carry out. They carry them out because the state has said that the municipalities should do so, and so the state sends money for this. That is the agreement between the municipalities and the state.

It is interesting that one thinks the municipalities should handle this themselves. Is this the message MP Stenkvist wants to give to his voters in Hofors municipality, where one pays Sweden's second highest municipal tax? Does he want to say: Solve this yourselves, because we do not intend to do it for you—despite the fact that you voted for us in the parliamentary election and despite the fact that we promised to fix this country for you! I find that interesting. But it is fine; I shall inform the people of Hofors that this is the Sweden Democrats' message.

I hope, however, that we can get an answer regarding the tax cut. People talk about it happening automatically, but it is also a conscious choice from the Sweden Democrats' and the government's side not to stop it. It is a tax cut that occurs due to automatic adjustments – yes, of course, but one can also make a decision that it should not be implemented because we here in this chamber consider that the money can be used in a better way than that Member Stenkvist and I receive a tax cut of 1,500 kronor per month. One can think that it is more important that the municipalities should be able to build a good school for all children and that the teachers should have good working conditions.

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! This is an automatic adjustment due to inflation, and we have stood behind the adjustment. We have not made any decision to abolish it, because even tax increases and high taxes have negative effects. I am for a reasonable tax level. I am not for any neoliberal low-tax society – I have never been – but it is, as always, a balancing act.

If you raise taxes, you decrease business activity and tax revenues in society. There is something called the Laffer Curve, which shows that tax revenues to the state decrease if taxes go over a certain limit because the activity in the working life simply decreases. It is, therefore, a balancing act. We stand behind this. Now we are in an economic crisis, but the first thing we do is not to remove the rules and reforms we have previously stood behind.

When it comes to the fact that municipalities should not receive any help, we stand behind the 6 billion to the municipalities. That is not small change, is it? Furthermore, we send money through what is being addressed in UbU16. It is a lot of reforms and grants, which have been tallied here earlier. It is a considerable amount of money that goes to the municipalities, and we think that the municipalities should have that help and those funds in the situation that prevails today.

If we could afford more, we would certainly send more, but we believe that society's resources are limited somewhere. They do not grow on trees. As I usually say: It is not monopoly money we are sending out, but it is real money.

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

Anders Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for a very interesting presentation, Member of Parliament! I appreciated it greatly. You mentioned that there might not be such a large difference between, on one hand, the government's and the supporting party's budget and, on the other hand, the proposals coming from the other parties, and that is how it looks. Instead, it is perhaps ideological differences that are interesting to discuss.

I would like to ask you two things, Robert Stenkvist. Your sister parties in Europe, for example Hungary, have pursued a rather aggressive policy towards universities and colleges. From a political standpoint, universities have been closed and the government controls and directs the research, that is, what should be researched and so on. I would like to hear you reason somewhat about how you think the balance between politics and the scientific community should look, as well as the balance between politics and educational institutions.

The second question concerns the fact that you mentioned you have made a kind of journey and seen that there are very many foreign students and foreign doctoral students at Sweden's colleges and universities who live under rather deplorable conditions and, in principle, risk being questioned every day and perhaps not being able to stay in Sweden. We have students from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Oman, USA, Finland, Italy and Belgium - from all countries around the world.

Should we interpret this as that you now want us to increase immigration to Sweden and that more people should be allowed to stay? Is that how we should interpret this? Do the Sweden Democrats, in their entirety, stand behind that?

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! The last question confused me a bit. It was a rule for foreign researchers. Those rules are unnecessarily complicated and not adequately adapted to those who are to conduct research or pursue a doctorate at colleges and universities. Many signals have come that the rules are not adapted for that group. I have always thought that the rules are far too lax for those who come here to work. Those rules need to be tightened - and shall be tightened, if I have understood the Tidö Agreement correctly. It is a matter of tightening them in the right way. I would like to add some rules.

There is no specific paragraph in the Aliens Act for researchers and doctoral students who are to work at Swedish universities. It concerns chapter 5, if I remember correctly. A paragraph should be introduced for that group so that the rules are adapted for them, but maintenance requirements and so on must still be imposed.

This will not increase immigration at all - because these people are not counted as immigrants, are they? They might be counted as labor migrants. There is supposed to be a free flow between the colleges and the universities. Now I see the member is becoming confused. This is, therefore, about those who are to work at Swedish universities - no other group.

I also have to answer that one about Hungary: No, SD has no sister party in Hungary. Fidesz is not a sister party to us and has never been. Hardly anyone in my party knows what they stand for, but we know that they are very conservative. That is where the knowledge ends for practically everyone I know.

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

Anders Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! It is good that the member has two minutes left so that we have time to sort this out properly.

First, it concerns the issue of foreign students and researchers who come to Sweden. Swedish society often pays for their education and doctoral positions, and as things stand right now, the students are then forced to go home with completed education to Pakistan, Afghanistan, USA, Ireland, or wherever they are coming from now.

It can also be that the students come here with their families or find love in Sweden. As far as I can judge, immigration increases if the Sweden Democrats introduce rules that allow precisely these persons to stay in Sweden. Is that not so, member?

I now return to the Sweden Democrats' reasoning regarding how the relationship between politics and the universities should look. Should politics govern what should be researched? Should politics decide which educational institutions should receive which tasks and so on? What does freedom look like in the Sweden Democrats' world regarding the role of the universities?

And several representatives for the Sverigedemokraterna have indeed praised how things look in Hungary, so there is certainly a connection with Fidesz!

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! We have perhaps praised their immigration policy. But Fidesz is not a sister party to us. It has never been.

I can begin with the relationship between politics and the academic freedom of the universities. The freedom shall not be less than it is today, but rather greater.

The strategic research grants involve a political steering today. A political steering occurs if one, for example, looks at how the Swedish Research Council distributes its grants. I have read about their grants every year, and I have read a number of regulatory letters. There is a political steering. I think it should decrease rather than increase. But there will always be a political steering. It is the taxpayers who finance the whole affair, and that means it will always be steered in some way. We should be honest enough to say that.

Member of the Board Ådahl is right that an increased proportion of researchers who research in Sweden today and in the future will likely be able to stay here. It will probably be quite few, but I believe that the proportion can increase by a fair amount.

I would have liked to say something more about Hungary, but I will yield. We can have that discussion another time.

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

Mats Wiking (S)

Madam Speaker! Sweden has a great need for educated personnel at all levels of education. Much is also happening in the climate transition, where Sweden is at the forefront of technical development. In order to maintain a good welfare and make climate adaptations, the pace of education needs to be increased.

Now, twelve educational institutions will receive reduced funding. Several of them are particularly important for the supply of skills. This applies, for example, to teacher training, social worker programs, and nursing education. There are also very important educations within the climate transition. It is about the welfare sector's competence needs overall.

What does the government intend to do about the large competence needs that exist within these industries, and what does SD intend to do? Money is being saved, but it is said that the educational needs will still be met. What does the member say about this?

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! I read through the budget measures while I was sitting in my seat just now. It is about very small reductions, I must say.

Twelve educational institutions receive lower grants, but it is very little. A good number of colleges receive increased grants. I do not know exactly why the twelve receive this rather marginal reduction, but I am sure that it does not affect the educational capacity in any way. We also have inflation. In the future, the appropriations will be increased in accordance with inflation – at least that I take for granted.

I started as a political secretary here in 2010. The higher education institutions have essentially received a linear increase in every budget since 2010. That twelve institutions now receive a marginal reduction is actually a very small adjustment.

Where society has a need for competence, there must simply be investments in the future. This is a first budget in this mandate period, and I believe that deeper analyses will take place moving forward. SD is not part of the government - we are a support party - but I am sure and have heard that deeper analyses will take place. Where there is a societal need, there must also be investments. It is very important.

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

Mats Wiking (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for the answers, Robert Stenkvist! What I am reflecting on is the great educational need that exists now when there is a recession. In a recession, one usually invests in education - at least when the Social Democrats are in power. In a recession, one wants to invest in education so that people do not end up excluded or fail to enter the labor market. That is why we Social Democrats invest 1.4 billion more on education than the government does with SD's support.

How does the member intend for the supply needs to be met not only at the university but also in adult education? There is an enormous need for education, and we also have increasing youth cohorts. Can the member answer this?

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! Vocational training and practical education are not exactly my area, but I have heard the debate here earlier and that the government is accused of a reduction. The government says, however, that they are investing in other areas. Generally, I can say that looking towards the future, I believe that an investment in practical education is more important than more university places.

The Social Democrats are investing a sum for more educational places, if I saw correctly. I believe that an investment in more practical vocational educations is better, because that is what the labor market is crying out for, and that is where the greatest shortage exists. Many who are practically minded go into theoretical university educations. I have said that before in this speaker's chair.

In the Tidö Agreement, it is signaled that an increased investment in vocational colleges will take place during the coming years, if I have read the agreement correctly. It is very welcome.

When it comes to higher education, I do not quite agree with the Social Democrats. Now we are in a crisis situation with an economic downturn, and in such cases, it is tradition to invest in education – that is correct. But within university education and theoretical higher education, we must have more focus on quality and not just produce more study places. When it comes to the proportion of the population that undergoes a theoretical higher education, we are already at a world-class level. It is the quality that has fallen in recent years. I have said it many times before in this speaker's chair, and I actually intended to refrain from saying it today – I thought everyone would appreciate it.

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

Anders Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! In Sweden, we have two parallel societies where people do not participate in or see themselves as part of society as a whole. We have, on one hand, the gang environments in the marginalized areas with honor violence, shootings, and general insecurity, and on the other hand, the right-wing nationalist environment with hate, often in social media, which unfortunately produces people such as the Visby murderer Theodor Engström. Common to both of these environments is that the people there often do not have a place on the labor market and that they often lack education.

Why do we have universities? Why do we have higher education? Why do we have research?

The short answer is that we believe it pays off for us humans and our society. It is for the good of our prosperity and for us humans to have a better life on all levels. Higher education and research give us longer lives, richer lives, greater understanding, and more coherence. It makes us more educated, so that we can feel respect and understanding for those who think differently. We understand that there are climate changes and that vaccinations help. It makes society safer when we, through education, can feel more trust in one another.

For us in Sweden, it is of extra importance to also be at the forefront, as our entire prosperity is built on our ability to compete with products and services with high knowledge content. We do not compete with low wages, but we compete with knowledge and with education.

But I want to take a step back and clarify the essence of higher education and research a bit more precisely so that we can understand what policy should be pursued.

The Academy has two characteristics: to be a place for curiosity and to be a place for sensitivity.

To be a place for curiosity is also to be a place for free thought, to stand unaffected by industrial influence, to stand unaffected by political influence and to stand unaffected by research funders' various kinds of ideas about what is most important.

But to be a place for curiosity is not just about free thought as such, but also about the right thought. With the right thought, we can mean the pursuit of truth, to constantly be critical of the prevailing truth, and to want to falsify that which we today hold to be true through new discoveries and new insights that are tested and verified in scientific studies.

Thus, the academy's characteristic of curiosity is a place not only for free thought but also for right thought. Perhaps some here in the chamber are familiar with Thomas Thorild's winged words from 1794, which stand in golden letters above the entrance to the hall in the University House in Uppsala. There it stands: "To think freely is great, but to think rightly is greater." Depending somewhat on what Thorild actually meant, perhaps we today can state that the academy is a place for free thought of high quality that leads us to new insights.

The Academy is, however, not just a place for curiosity and free thought, but also a place for responsiveness to society's needs in the shorter term. How do we best carry out an electrification of the industrial sector? How do we best cure cancer? How do we understand social patterns in areas of exclusion?

Listening is the other side of the coin. How can knowledge be effectively shared with society? How do we educate for the needs of the labor market? Collaboration with society's actors is extremely important for our country and is actually a strong point – we often rank at the top in international comparisons when it comes to, for example, innovations.

Now, what really matters is the quality of research. The quality of Swedish research appears to be declining. It is an early signal that the quality of our products and services also risks declining over time, which would be devastating for our welfare.

A contributing cause is probably an increasingly less independent and free research in Sweden. Recently, with the research propositions that have been presented, the focus has increasingly been directed towards innovation and utilization - towards the utilitarian side. Likewise, the funding to universities and colleges has increasingly tilted towards that side. Centerpartiet wants to deliberate carefully on this issue of balance and development of Swedish higher education and research.

Curiosity and responsiveness define the modern academy. Both are needed, and they need each other. But it is not entirely simple, either for the leadership of the higher education institutions or for politics, to handle both sides of the academic coin. Most of the higher education institutions are authorities, and this is, frankly, a construction that poorly vaccinates against political meddling.

From the Center Party's side, we want to work towards making the educational institutions more autonomous and giving them further opportunities to design their activities according to their own circumstances. We also want to strengthen academic freedom and focus more on increased quality.

Centerpartiet also wants, for the sake of the labor market, diversity, and the whole country, that educational institutions should exist throughout the country and that further opportunities are given to design their operations according to regional conditions. Universities are often regional engines.

I also want to say a few words about the university college.

The Center Party has been involved in expanding the vocational higher education both during the Alliance period and in cooperation with the previous government within the framework of the January agreement. These are important educations that meet the labor market's needs and are based on the companies and the labor market's need for competence.

Our working lives are becoming longer. In order for more people to be able to and want to work longer, it must become easier to change careers later in life. Vocational educations are suitable for both people who have just finished upper secondary school and for those who want to complement their previous education after having worked for many years. We need to have a more agile education system, so that one can retrain later in life, and enable both short and long educations within the university colleges.

Yrkeshögskolan has proven to be a very successful initiative, where over 90 percent of all those who graduate get jobs after completed studies. It is a success story that Centerpartiet has driven and wants to continue to develop.

The folk high schools have great freedom to design their courses based on the profile the school has. This makes it easier for the course participants to design their education according to the needs, interests, and prior knowledge that each student has through both short and long courses. We want to further facilitate for the folk high schools to be a part of people's lifelong learning.

Centerpartiet proposes a strengthening of the National Centre for Women's Peace. NCK carries out a very important activity, which includes, among other things, a support line. To meet the increased pressure on the support line as well as the great need for education and competence support, Centerpartiet proposes an increase in the budget of 20 million kronor.

Centerpartiet further proposes an investment in students' mental health, including the design of a system that allows students to be on part-time sick leave. For this reason, it is proposed that appropriation 2:64 be increased by 8 million kronor in relation to the government's budget proposal.

I want to summarize by saying that it is extremely important that, for the sake of quality and for the sake of Sweden's competitiveness, we ensure that we get more autonomous and independent educational institutions, for example in the form of foundations. Without independent research and education, we have a harder time identifying, understanding, and solving societal problems. Academic freedom and freedom of expression go hand in hand and must be defended and developed every day.

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Madam Speaker! I thank Anders Ådahl for the speech. I agree with a great deal, for example, that education is important and that education pays off – one gets a richer life. We shall be at the forefront. I also agree that the quality risks to decline and that we must develop this.

I was very surprised when I saw that C wants to reduce the appropriations in the budget to almost all educational institutions, and also to the Swedish Space Agency, the Institute of Space Physics, and so on. I am a bit curious about how we are to develop the quality when the member's party wants to reduce the appropriations for these areas.

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

Anders Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! I thank you very much for the question, which is good and natural. In the tables, we have marginal reductions over the line. That is because we have a different way than the government of calculating the costs.

Centerpartiet's total budget should be seen as a whole. When it comes to the envelope, we have chosen to have a budget in the same order of magnitude as the government's. We do not do as the Left Party does - over-financing and risking our economic stability over time - but stay at the same level.

Overall, the Centre Party has made a number of prioritizations. For example, we want to maintain the Swedish tradition of being a warm country with a large amount of aid. We also want, unlike the government, to follow the work line and have lower taxes. Those reforms cost a fair amount of money, and then one must find some crowns in other places. But the observation is correct.

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Madam Speaker! It concerns almost 1.5 billion within this expenditure area, so it is still quite a lot. It is not entirely marginal. Therefore, I am still a bit curious. I understand that one must prioritize in different ways. But since the member emphasized that we must increase the quality, it sounds a bit strange that one is reducing the appropriations. I know that the member cares a lot about the staff working at universities and colleges. But perhaps that is not really what one does if one reduces the appropriations. I am also very worried about space research, which we have spoken about previously here. For example, the Swedish Space Agency receives a reduced appropriation. I think it is a very important area. I feel a bit of concern over the C's priorities.

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

Anders Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! I do not think the member needs to feel any particular concern, because education, higher education and research are issues that rank high among the Center Party's priorities this parliamentary term. What we are doing now is that, in relation to the government, we have 1.5 percent fewer investments in just this budget.

There is no direct causal link between the number of kronor and öre and the quality of higher education and research. It is also about what priorities one makes within the higher education sector. It is not certain that we need to have a large number of researchers to achieve high quality. One can work with slightly fewer researchers and slightly fewer employees but still achieve a higher quality. It is entirely possible. We in the chamber should not believe that the number of kronor and öre is the same thing as quality. This actually applies to all expenditure areas, and it is important.

We in the Center Party have chosen during this mandate period to say that we are a constructive opposition. For us, it means that we will oppose as soon as the government and the supporting party submit proposals that we believe are heading in the wrong direction for our country. "Constructive" means that we would like to contribute to developing the policy. I look forward to a cooperation during the mandate period where we can move issues regarding higher education and research forward, because it is, as I said in my main speech, incredibly important for our prosperity.

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

Camilla Hansén (MP)

Madam Speaker! I thank Anders Ådahl for his statements and answers. I would nevertheless like to drill down a bit further into some of the questions that I myself have reflected on.

One must invest if one wants to commit to something. Now, Member Ådahl said that there is no direct causal link between the amount of kronor and öre and the quality of teaching and research, and that fewer researchers and fewer employees can do a better job because one chooses to do the right things. It surprises me a bit that one says that if one wants to commit to higher education and research. Both Anders Ådahl and I have backgrounds in higher education, even if they are of different kinds. I see both how university bureaucrats, like myself, run faster and how researchers find it harder and harder to devote their time to research and teaching.

Centerpartiet is the only party that cuts money. If you cut money, it will cost somewhere. It is something that should be reduced. Possibly something is removed entirely and the money is put on something else. I wonder what those priorities look like.

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

Anders Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! I must return to the answer I gave just now. Our budget in this expenditure area represents a marginal difference in relation to the government's proposal. I do not think we should make too much of a fuss about this.

I share Camilla Hansen's picture that the staff, the researchers, the teachers, and the managements at universities and colleges are under severe pressure. It is a very intense work. The severe pressure is often due to the fact that politics year in and year out has given more and more assignments to precisely the universities and colleges. We now have, for example, with the transition study support, an issue that one would like to see the universities and colleges take responsibility for. At the same time, we have universities of applied sciences with an incredible hit rate of 90 percent who get work after studies. They could step in and make larger contributions. We also see that the business sector can step forward and take parts of the assignments.

It is about how one prioritizes. Quality and quantity are quite different things. If we aim for quality, we can have a discussion about how we, for example, organize the university and college sector in order to be able to save money and at the same time increase the quality.

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

Camilla Hansén (MP)

Madam Speaker! There is some interesting material here that can be discussed further. I absolutely agree that it is not always a university education that is needed to strengthen someone's position on the labor market. That is why the transition study support is broader than that. But I do believe that higher education needs to play a role. I believe it will be easier to take that role if one feels the political support that there is a will to invest in higher education.

My second question also concerns the Center Party's markings regarding cuts. What surprises me is that it is sometimes small amounts of money. When one wants to invest in preschool, one, for example, cuts back on competence development for preschool teachers and teachers. In preschool, there is a professional group that works incredibly hard. It is described time and again, among other things via Förskoleupproret, how the work situation is becoming increasingly pressured. At the same time, I dare say that our parties are in complete agreement that preschool lays the foundation for further education. When preschool functions well, children get the opportunity to grow into strong individuals.

I would simply like to hear how you want to develop preschool. I invite you to a collaboration there. We in Miljöpartiet will allocate 2 billion for an equality grant for preschool. It is a new appropriation in the state budget that we will provide. There, we could do things together. When one works with us on education issues, it is about investing in and investing in education and those who work within education. It would be interesting, Madam Speaker, to hear if Member Ådahl is curious to drill a bit into this.

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

Anders Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! Yes, the Centre Party is very interested in drilling. We are happy to drill together and develop this policy area. As I stated in the previous exchange of remarks, we have chosen the stance of being a constructive opposition during this parliamentary term. "Constructive" means in this case that we, together with both other opposition parties as well as government parties and support parties, want to discuss how we can develop the higher education and university area.

Let me return to our budget priorities, so that this becomes clear. We have chosen a total envelope in our proposal for the state budget that is as large as in the government's budget. At the same time, we have wanted to maintain a work line, because we believe that it will make society richer if people get into work rather than receiving benefits. We also believe that a maintained assistance is a path that a wealthy country like Sweden can take. That means that in different political areas we have had to save a small krona here and a small krona there. That has been the case also for the university and higher education area.

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Madam Speaker! I am pleased to be able to begin by saying that I support the report in its entirety regarding expenditure area 16. It feels very positive.

It has been three quite interesting days and evenings with debates, but perhaps a bit long evenings. It reminds a bit of one's own student days when one sat up in the evenings and studied. There have been many interesting discussions about education in all its forms from preschool, primary school and up to university and research.

Important discussions are being held here. We have also had labor market discussions in the debate these past few days. We know that work and studies go together. One has a much greater chance of obtaining a job and livelihood in the future if one has undergone studies in some form.

My colleague Josefin Malmqvist gave a productive account of the Moderates' education budget on Monday. I hope you will remember what she spoke about then, but obviously you will remember the many important things she said. I will now devote myself to colleges and research.

Madam Speaker! The goal for the entire expenditure area is that Sweden shall be a prominent knowledge and research nation. It shall be of high quality and excellence. That is actually the goal of all education that exists.

The Moderates and our coalition partners within the Tidö Agreement have as main priorities that we need to strengthen and develop Sweden's position so that we can continue to be a leading knowledge and research nation. We shall not falter but maintain this. We are a very capable nation. Despite our smallness, we are great out in the world.

Since 2016, the Moderaterna have worked with the issue that we want it to be possible to compare educational institutions when it comes to quality. It is important that they maintain high quality. But students should also be given the opportunity to see which universities maintain higher quality, where they can more easily find work afterwards, and what they can get in salary and so on.

I am glad that it is now being implemented. This has been done together with students, the business community, and universities. Now, the University and College Council has also been tasked with ensuring that it is implemented so that students can compare. They should be able to know that our higher education institutions maintain high quality and which ones maintain higher quality than others.

Madam Speaker! What has not been finalized is the assignment given that recruitment to shortage occupations should be broadened. The number of places was to be increased. That goal has not quite been seen. That fulfillment of the goal did not occur, at least not in the sub-goals that were set.

That proposal remains. Does it help to just increase the number of places? First and foremost, the places must be filled, but they must also be of high quality. This will be reported on March 31 next year. We hope that we get a good result there. Otherwise, one will probably have to review whether this was so appropriate.

Madam Speaker! The reason I speak so much about the importance of quality in education is that we know it is crucial for making people want to study, but also for ensuring that they enter the labor market.

We also know that there is a great concern about skills shortages. We spoke a good deal about it yesterday when we spoke about student support and transition study support. Many companies testify to the skills shortage. We must do something about this so that we have staff who can work with the new innovations that come to Sweden.

We are very proud that, for example, battery factories are coming to Göteborg, Mariestad, Borlänge and Skellefteå. But we must also have the workforce there.

A green transition is taking place that is very important for all educational institutions and also for the business sector. Everyone needs to transition here. This morning we had a visit from our County Governor of Västra Götaland, Sten Tolgfors. He spoke precisely about how all the conversations he had with companies, the business sector, regions, and municipalities were about the green transition. We must include this in all educations and actually in all conversations.

Madam Speaker! In the government statement, our Prime Minister said: "The Swedish business community is a greenhouse for prosperity and innovation, but now also an important environmental movement - world-leading in sustainability and green transition. The government will be an offensive partner in that work. And all the enterprising people who create jobs, prosperity and dynamism deserve our respect." I think those are very wise words. Without development, Sweden stands still.

Madam Speaker! What do the Moderates and the coalition partners want to invest further in? There are very many exciting areas. My colleague Robert Stenkvist mentioned space research earlier. It is incredibly important and spans many areas within medical, climate, and technology research.

Esrange Space Center in Kiruna was mentioned. There, we absolutely want there to be satellite launches. Already now, feverish activity regarding space research is ongoing all over the world. We want it to be improved so that we get our long-awaited satellite launches.

I was at my life's first space watch a few months ago at the Space Administration when the satellite Mats was launched via New Zealand. It was fantastically fun. Now that we have a space minister named Mats, I think that this will be supported even further.

What Mats is going to do is to measure waves in the atmosphere and how they affect the climate. It is extremely important. It is future research that we will work much more with.

Madam Speaker! Another exciting thing that has happened in the space area is that we have received our own new astronaut. Out of 22,500 applicants, Marcus Wandt became one of the 17 selected from all over the world. He has previously been a fighter pilot and also a test pilot at Saab in Linköping. He is, of course, a trained civil engineer. Can you guess where he studied? He studied at Chalmers in Gothenburg, of course.

Higher education can also lead out into space. One can, therefore, become an astronaut. Higher education and also space research make it possible for us to get more students to choose to study within science and technology. There are many who do not want to study in those areas. This can lead to more people applying to those areas.

Sweden works very closely with space research within the EU with ESA, European Space Agency. It is very important that we continue that cooperation. We have a proper budget commitment there.

We have something that the Moderates have long pushed for. The Space Act has been revised. This means that one can now work more with both public research and private sector research within space research.

Madam Speaker! In the Tidö Agreement, we have written a lot about how teacher education is very important. We want to raise the status of teachers and develop teacher education and also raise teachers' salaries. We also want to reduce the administrative burden on teachers and invest more in special education teachers and student health. Teachers are incredibly important for all education.

We also want to facilitate for teachers who want to conduct research and focus on practice close to school research. An important question is how we can recruit more teachers. We know that there are academics who wish to study to become teachers. We want to facilitate their supplementary pedagogical education. It is called KPU.

We have very much to be proud of in Sweden. When it comes to research, we have two facilities in Lund. We have ESS, European Spallation Source. It is a research facility that, with neutron sources, makes it possible to study materials at a molecular and atomic level. This can be used within medicine, chemistry, biology, physics, and technology. It is set to start in 2027.

We also have MAX IV as a neighbor in Lund. It was inaugurated in 2016. Here, the world's brightest and most focused X-rays are created. These two can collaborate to, for example, develop medicines with fewer side effects. This could, for example, involve developing solutions to address antibiotic resistance, which is a major concern in the world. There are many more areas I would like to highlight, but I must stay within the framework of the debate.

A major concern is that we have fewer Swedish students who want to become doctoral students and conduct research. That number is decreasing. It is extremely important to regain interest in this.

It applies, for example, within the medical profession, which I myself come from. It is fewer and fewer doctors who want to conduct research. This is usually due to the fact that they are uncertain about the funding. They are uncertain about whether they can combine clinic and research. But they also do not really see it as a career ladder.

One does not see in society what use one has of doctoral students. There are several areas where someone who has defended a thesis seems to be overqualified. One does not know what to do with that person. We must change that. It is a matter of the business sector, municipalities, and regions seeing the utility of the research.

Madam Speaker! The Moderates consider that education and research issues are very important for the individual, society, and Sweden. We want to invest an enormous amount in all research.

Finally, I would like to wish all staff, colleagues in the Riksdag, and also all teachers in Sweden working in all educational fields a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

In this speech, Gustaf Göthberg and Oliver Rosengren (both M) agreed.

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

Lorena Delgado Varas (V)

Madam Speaker! We from Vänsterpartiet are trying to get answers from the government parties and Sverigedemokraterna but are not really getting them. The member spoke very nicely about competence, staffing, and the transition. It requires its work and its preparation. I would like to say that everything begins in preschool and primary school. After that, one proceeds to universities, colleges and so on.

But in this year's budget, the government is allocating 6 billion to Sweden's municipalities and regions, while SKR argues that 20 billion is required just to be able to maintain the staffing levels in municipalities and regions. This means that 14 billion is missing. And it means that approximately 15,000 jobs are threatened. Those jobs will be taken from school, healthcare, and elderly care.

What I would like to know from the member is, then: How will we be able to achieve competence and staffing when we withdraw the foundation for that staffing? And which employees does the member consider must go?

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you very much, Member Lorena Delgado Varas, for the question!

I cannot answer as to who will leave their jobs, which the member wanted an answer on, but what I can say is that we see a redistribution in how we handle the economy. Of course, we want to invest in keeping our education and our preschool teachers and teachers. But we have a redistribution in the financing of this. I can, however, promise that we will not dismiss as many people as the member is worried about, but we have a security in how we want to provide for, from preschool, primary school, and up to the high school and university level.

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

Lorena Delgado Varas (V)

Madam Speaker! Yes, we have heard about the redistribution today. The redistribution comes from those who earn over 50,000 a month, and there you have placed 13 billion kronor. Those people who have lower incomes than 50,000 kronor receive no tax cuts whatsoever.

Is that how one creates an equal society where all students, regardless of economic background and regardless of which area they grow up in, have the same opportunities to advance to university and college?

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Lorena Delgado Varas, for the supplementary question. We are investing a great deal so that equality can be achieved and that there is an equal school already from primary school and preschool, so I can assure the member that we will not leave anyone behind. We absolutely have no plans to do so. We want, of course, that everyone shall have the right to an education and that it shall be of high quality and also that the staff shall have a good working environment, from preschool and primary school, in the entire educational area. Our investments ensure that this will work. The member does not need to be worried about this.

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

Mats Wiking (S)

Madam Speaker! Member Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström speaks a lot about quality and education at a higher level - very interesting - as well as research; the undersigned needs to learn much more about this.

I intend to return to the educational need. We are talking about the fact that we need a very large number of trained staff at all levels, both within welfare and within practical occupations: high school level, folk high school level, vocational adult education and university.

We have already established earlier in the debate that the government is spending 1.4 billion less on education, even though there was a discussion here on Monday evening that this was not quite correct. But when one looks at the tables, one still sees that it is 1.4 billion less for education.

Then we have the transition study support, which seems to be a success, in the opinion of the undersigned. There have been 22,000 applications, and there are 5,000 in the government's budget. That is 17,000 who are left without education in the transition support. Still, we are talking about that there is an enormous need for education both in mid-life and among young people.

How does the government intend to meet the enormous needs that exist? Both employers and unions are critical of the government's passivity. They say that no investment is being made in the peripheral services needed for the transition study support to have full impact, and that investment is also needed in guidance and validation.

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you very much for the question from Member Mats Wiking! It is quite correct that we think the transition study support is good. It became, just as the Member says, a large influx. There are 22,000 who have applied and who will also go through transition organizations where it is determined who is entitled to receive transition study support.

We have thought that it starts now from 2023 and will be completely distributed by 2026; so that is the plan. Of course, we will take care of those who are granted [it]. This will, as we talked about earlier, be done in consultation with and together with the municipalities, the regions, and the companies, so that we solve it.

Many companies are of course also very interested in obtaining this correct competence. I know that, for example, Northvolt is very interested in this. SKF in Gothenburg is already busy training so that one obtains the competence that is demanded. Volvo is also involved in this. The companies do need this specialized competence and will help so that we get the opportunity to carry this out.

All occupations will therefore be needed, but much will change in relation to how it has been previously.

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

Mats Wiking (S)

Madam Speaker! I noticed that 22,000 have applied, and there is a budget for 5,000. How does the member intend for it to be possible to manage to receive all applications and offer them student grant support when this only exists for 5,000 in the budget?

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you very much, Mats Wiking, for the question. What has been said is that 22,000 have applied. We do not know how many will be granted transition study support, but we will find that out next year. What we know now is that there is no time to go through all the applications because it requires a lot of manual review since the applicants have many different backgrounds.

To be able to start an education in January, one can either have it paid out retroactively, if it is granted, or have the possibility to take the regular student support instead. People can, of course, find those solutions. That there was such a surge is obviously very positive. We want people to develop and make a transition; that is what is needed now. We will take care of it, obviously. The budget is increasing until 2026, so we have a plan for this.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! Due to special circumstances, the Left Party's special statement could not be entered into the minutes at the committee meeting. Therefore, I wish to state it orally here from the rostrum.

The Left Party's proposal regarding the state budget is in the party motion A fair path through the crisis - The Left Party's budget motion for 2023. In that motion, there are also proposals for the framework for expenditure area 16. The Left Party's budget alternative for the expenditure area implies the following: Sweden is today alone in the world in having legislation that allows schools to be started to extract profits from tax funds, completely without limitations, furthermore.

Profit-driven schools also have an interest in driving up students' grades in the hope of attracting more students. Publicly run schools are obliged to offer education to all students, including children who need more support and children whose previous schools have been forced into bankruptcy. Already today, there is sufficient evidence for the issue to be investigated promptly and for a profit ban to be enacted in the coming years.

The image of Sweden as an equal country with a school system with a strong focus on equality and compensatory measures is incorrect today. Sweden has an unusually strongly segregated school system, in an international comparison.

According to the OECD, Swedish school segregation is clearly greater than the OECD average.

Children with low academic results are significantly more often grouped together in the same school than in other countries, and those with good academic results are concentrated in other schools. Sweden is also, from an international perspective, average in terms of fulfilling the compensatory mission and offsetting the students' socioeconomic circumstances.

Vänsterpartiet wants to see a new resource distribution model for primary school and preschool class that is more compensatory.

The equity grant that exists today needs to be strengthened, and the possibilities for school principals to counteract the equity grant's compensatory effect need to be reduced. An equity grant for upper secondary school similar to the one in primary and secondary school should also be introduced, but designed so that it takes into account the structure of upper secondary school.

The government's appropriation to Skolverket for elite classes is rejected by Vänsterpartiet in favor of its own initiatives for general support to the municipalities, and therefore 5 million kronor less is allocated than in the government's proposal. Furthermore, the government's reduction on quality dialogues of 61 million kronor is rejected. In total, 56 million kronor more is allocated than the government does.

There are too few school libraries, and those that exist are not all staffed. The investigation on strengthened school libraries and teaching materials proposes in the report School Libraries for Education and Training an investment in more qualified school librarians. The investigation's proposal should be implemented, and therefore an increase of 4 million kronor compared to the government's proposal is suggested. Also, the proposal regarding school for leave in previous years is rejected, and therefore 100 million kronor less is allocated than in the government's proposal. Furthermore, the proposal for support of 20 million kronor to elite classes is rejected in favor of own general investments in schools as well as the government's investment in duty and emergency schools at 50 million kronor.

It is important that all children have the opportunity to attend preschool regardless of their parents' finances, and therefore Vänsterpartiet proposes that a free allowance be introduced in the maximum fee. For this, 1.3 billion kronor more is allocated than the government does. A free allowance is also proposed for the after-school care fee, and for this purpose, we allocate 600 million kronor more than the government. Furthermore, the children's groups in the after-school centers are too large, and a staffing increase is therefore proposed targeted towards after-school centers with the greatest need. For this purpose, 300 million kronor is allocated.

In total, 2.2 billion kronor more are being abolished than in the government's proposal.

Vänsterpartiet wants to make an investment of 30 million kronor in course literature for adult students so that it will be possible for more people to study. Furthermore, an investment of 10 million kronor is proposed to make it possible for more students with disabilities to take the higher education entrance exam. Additionally, 10 million kronor is invested to ensure the funding of the higher education entrance exam and thereby avoid today's underfunding leading to increased fees for those who are to take the exam.

Madam Speaker! The government uses very fine words about the Swedish school and what is desired to be the result of the proposed policy. The bitter truth is, however, that there will be drastic cuts within the entire welfare system across the whole country, where the school will likely take a big hit, if not the biggest.

This is what the government does with the Sweden Democrats' good memory, as they in practice remote-control the government's work. It is not surprising, however. Government Minister Jimmie Åkesson usually does not talk about the school's area at all; it does not seem to be particularly prioritized by the Sweden Democrats. There will be major cuts if the municipalities do not implement large tax increases. I am convinced that this was not what the voters expected when they cast their vote for the right-wing nationalists on election day earlier this year.

I regret that the Swedish people are not given the opportunity to experience what a Left Party budget could have meant for them in their everyday lives, not least for the students and teachers in schools. What awaits now is either large municipal tax increases or drastically cut resources for schools. The Sweden Democrats and the government choose to lower taxes for those who earn over 50,000 kronor a month and to lower the price of gasoline by 14 öre per liter. Another alternative would have been possible with the Left Party's proposal.

With this, I would like to thank you for this debate with the word that my son Oliver would like me to use: Bababoj! It might be able to summarize the government's budget bill as a whole.

(Applause)

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Madam Speaker! I believe we all in here share the view that Swedish school needs to become more compensatory and that we need to make very large efforts so that all students can reach the goals in school, that more students can get into upper secondary school and so on.

The government is now making very large investments so that the students who have it toughest in school will have greater opportunities to reach the goals. It is about implementing measures earlier and investing in holiday school, more special education teachers, reading initiatives, and much more.

But we also have a group of students in all year groups and in all schools in Sweden who are very high-performing and capable young people. I can feel as a liberal, with my starting point, that not all students will learn the same thing in the same way in the same amount of time. We have a group of students who are very capable and who need more stimulation. They really need to be allowed to read at a faster pace. These are students in primary school who can read at a high school level and students in high school who could be reading university courses.

Vänsterpartiet now wants to remove the pilot project that has been ongoing for over ten years and which was introduced by Folkpartiet and the alliance government in 2010, I believe it was, with advanced classes in upper secondary school and upper secondary school. Then it has been extended step by step, and we now want it to be made permanent. Vänsterpartiet wants to remove it completely.

Why should a student who is very good at mathematics or languages not be able to attend a specialized class at the same time as a student who is very good at singing can attend, for example, Adolf Fredriks music classes in Stockholm? I do not understand the logic. Theoretical knowledge and very talented students must also receive stimulation.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member, for the question! Just as I said in my speech, the government uses very fine words about how they want the school to look and how it should function in reality. But the fact remains that the party that claims to be most for the school – the party that the Member represents – does not provide the money needed to be able to carry out the mission that the municipalities have been tasked with by the state, which is to provide a good compensatory education to all students.

That is what the Left Party considers that one must be able to do. All students, regardless of what needs they have and what advantages they have when it comes to being able to learn different things, shall be able to receive the education they need and that they can complete. But that also requires that the resources needed are allocated.

Instead, the government chooses to lower taxes for a small few in society. They provide various different excuses for why they must do this instead of ensuring that money is available in schools, where it is actually needed.

What is the logic, really, in only investing in individual students when the rest of the students are to suffer because one does not want to invest sufficient resources?

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Madam Speaker! The Left Party speaks here of the government merely waving around fine words, but that is not the case. This is a concrete activity; it exists here and now. We have a number of schools in Sweden that have advanced classes, where students in upper secondary school who are very good in, for example, mathematics, can read at a significantly faster pace. As a Liberal, I think that is very good. I think that this opportunity should exist.

Madam Speaker! We spend tens of billions on our school system, and a large part of these funds is redistribution. We have extensive socioeconomic redistribution in the vast majority of municipalities. In addition, we have supplementary amounts, and we have large investments in schools in vulnerable areas.

What we now in this budget say from the government and the Sweden Democrats, with whom we have negotiated the budget, is that we are going to allocate 20 million next year. It may seem like a very small sum, but it will make a very big difference for that group of students who could attend a specialized class but who today do not have the opportunity to do so.

The question still comes back to Vänsterpartiet. A student who is very good at swimming, skiing, playing hockey, football or handball, singing or playing guitar or piano has today great opportunities to attend schools with national admission, attend profile classes and attend special schools that have this niche. If one is very good at music or sports, one can do that. Should that opportunity not also exist within the Swedish school system for the one who is very good at mathematics, French or Swedish? Should those students not really be given the opportunity to persevere in order to reach their full potential and develop a bit more?

I think the view Vänsterpartiet has is very dull when it comes to giving the high-performing students that opportunity within the Swedish school system.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! One might think that the Left Party has a dull view. I think rather that it is a very dull view the Liberals have when they focus on just a small number, individual students, and want just those to be able to succeed and get much better. At the same time, one throws a lot of other students, who have completely different needs and conditions to succeed, under the bus.

Vänsterpartiet is a socialist party. We believe that all people should be given opportunities to manage in society based on their own circumstances. Therefore, we allocate much more resources to welfare than this government does. In fact, the government allocates so little money that SKR assesses that one will not even manage to maintain today's level of welfare. That is the problem with the government's budget.

There will be fewer teachers in schools. There will be more students whose needs will not be met with this government's policy, with the Liberals' policy.

Why do the Liberals not want all children to receive a good education in Sweden? It is quite strange. Instead, it is said that those who earn 50,000 a month - we who sit in this chamber - should get a tax cut. But it only applies to those who earn over 50,000 a month, not those who earn less; they do not suffer from inflation or anything of the sort. It is strange.

I find it difficult to see the logic in how the government and the Liberals choose to prioritize. But I thank you for the question.

(Applause)

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! I will not repeat what we have discussed earlier or what Fredrik Malm said. I just want to point out that extra resources also go to the students who are falling behind. They should also have extra resources. It is not just about resources going to those who need to attend a top class to be stimulated. It goes to different groups, and they receive different resources.

I come from Botkyrka municipality. Some schools in northern Botkyrka have had and still have major problems. The results are now starting to go up a little bit.

What I am trying to convey eagerly to Vänsterpartiet is that it is not just about money, Madam Speaker. Something other than money was needed. A different pedagogy was needed, interventions were needed, and fixed frameworks were needed so that those schools should function for the sake of the students and the children and so that they should have a good future. That is what one must think about. One should not just show off a document about that one invests the most, as in some kind of competition. It is for the students' sake that we are here. It requires something other than just showing off the largest budget items.

Madam Speaker! I want to ask a question. Throughout the entire debate, I have heard it said that SD would remote-control the government and lead the government. We actually became the largest party of the coalition parties. It is not strange that it has an impact in the negotiations. But there is a lot in the Tidö Agreement that the Sweden Democrats did not stand behind. There are some things that we do not jump for joy over in the agreement.

It was a negotiation, and we succeeded quite well. We are happy about that. But it was a negotiation. We do not remote-control any government. It happens in the way it always does in democracies.

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for the question, member!

When Vänsterpartiet entered the negotiations to let the Prime Minister through last year, we set the requirement that the guaranteed pension should be increased for 1 million people. That was our requirement.

What the Sweden Democrats are entering into a negotiation with is that they want to remove permanent residence permits for people who have lived in this country for over 40 years. They have worked and paid tax, but then their permanent residence permits are to be removed. That is what they are entering the negotiation with. Those people have contributed to Sweden being the fantastic country that it is today. There is a bit of a difference regarding what priorities we have.

It is the same when it comes to the area we are discussing today, the school. What did the Sverigedemokraterna enter the negotiation with?

Had it been Vänsterpartiet that negotiated with the incoming government, or if we had entered into a government, we would of course have started from our priorities. We would have prioritized that more money should go to the welfare sector. One can say what one wants about the need for different pedagogy and that different ways of working are required. But it still costs money. Someone is going to carry it out. It is staff who are going to carry out the various, fine reforms. Or does the member believe that they happen in a magical way? Is it just a matter of making decisions and then it happens? I do not think so.

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! I spoke about northern Botkyrka. The schools there receive significantly more money than the schools in southern Botkyrka, and they need significantly more money. I absolutely agree that they should have more money. It is not possible to conduct the teaching with the same teacher density as in southern Botkyrka, if we use Botkyrka as an example municipality.

What I am trying to convey is that it is not enough to just pour in more money. One must also have a different policy behind it and a different pedagogy out in the schools.

When it comes to permanent residence permits, as the member mentioned, most in the group that the member mentioned will be offered citizenship instead.

In the question regarding whether the previous government formation took place in accordance with established principles. But the government formation before that in 2018, when Sjöstedt supported the government, it took place through a conversation where Sjöstedt received a secret agreement on a piece of paper, which he put in a filing cabinet and which no one was allowed to see.

Such a way is something that the Sweden Democrats would not have stood behind. We would never have agreed to that during this government formation. Then there would have been no government. I do not think that Nooshi would have agreed to it either.

Does the member consider the formation of the government in 2018 to be a model?

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

Samuel Gonzalez Westling (V)

Madam Speaker! Once again – I conceded that it is not enough to merely provide more resources. But Swedish welfare is bleeding today. Swedish municipalities have incredible problems getting the finances to balance.

If the Sweden Democrats have somehow missed it, I can say that we are facing almost an economic crisis in the country. We have sky-high inflation. Even members in this chamber defend tax cuts for the very richest by saying that it is automatic because of the inflation.

So the richest are to get it better. It is to be made easier for the richest in society when there is a crisis. But the rest of Sweden, the rest of the population, shall have to pay the price for it. I find it difficult to see that.

At the same time, we know that SKR (Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner) has stated that 20 billion SEK in increased subsidies to municipalities and regions is required for us to be able to maintain today's levels of welfare, which are, in fact, too low. The government provides 6 billion. That equation does not add up. It means that we will see fewer staff in welfare and many more people entering unemployment.

Then one speaks of wanting what is best for Sweden. It is difficult to see the logic behind those arguments, but we have now also heard what the Sweden Democrats' priorities are.

(Applause)

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

Lorena Delgado Varas (V)

Madam Speaker! There are many beautiful and important foundations that education in Sweden has stood on. On the one hand, it has been economically accessible, that is to say, you do not pay for the education. We see it as a collective responsibility. On the other hand, there are several paths forward if you want to study at a college or at a university.

Many times we politicians speak of Sweden as a knowledge nation. It is the knowledge nation that is to take us through the transition. It is the knowledge nation that is to develop technologies for the future. It is the knowledge nation that is to make it possible for us to maintain and, preferably improve, the welfare society. Through knowledge, we thus get a more democratic and equal society that stands well through crises.

I myself have had the privilege of being a student in two different countries - Chile and Sweden. In Chile, education is not free. It didn't matter if you fought your way through school and had the best grades. If you didn't have the means and didn't receive any scholarship, you were out of luck. You could not continue your studies. The studies were segregating right from the beginning. Social class followed through all of primary school, through high school up to university or college - and racism as well, for that matter, if you were indigenous or, as today, if you come from Haiti, for example.

There are many good students who have not been able to complete their studies and many who have burdened themselves with debt to be able to attend some of the private universities, which often do not hold quality. Furthermore, there were not many paths into higher education. It was a straight path from upper secondary school to university.

When I started studying here in Sweden, the contrast was quite large. I started from scratch in higher education, so I experienced the Swedish "nollning" (orientation/placement test). In my class, there were people who came directly from upper secondary school. There was a group of women who had worked in healthcare and who wanted to retrain, and we others—random—who for various reasons had not started directly after upper secondary school were also there. Just that gave a breadth to the discussions that I had not experienced before. Another big difference was the access to technology. The labs here were fantastic. Sure, Chile's universities compensated with more in-depth knowledge in the subjects, but being able to experiment and test the latest technologies gave completely different conditions to take a step into the working life.

What I am describing now does not mean that we can turn a blind eye to the differences that also exist here in Sweden.

If we are to become a world-leading knowledge nation, the prerequisites for that must be real. We have taken steps backward in the development. We are not moving towards being a world-leading knowledge nation at all.

The differences begin at an early age. Even if children do not attend preschool, differences arise when they eventually start primary school. Today, it is quite precarious regarding what quality one receives in, for example, preschool, primary school, and upper secondary school. The differences increase at each of the steps in different ways depending on whether one is lucky enough to attend a school where resources are used correctly or if one attends a school where the priority is to secure profit. I personally come from an area where many of the students do not reach eligibility for upper secondary school. This is an unfair system towards them, but it is also an unfair system towards Sweden's future.

This year, the government is also cutting back for municipalities and regions. It will have an impact on school, healthcare, and elderly care. In a time when we need to rectify the differences and compensate all young people who have lost schooling due to the pandemic, and when society needs to strengthen its competence supply to be able to meet the transition needs, one chooses to cut back. It will have consequences for a fairly long time ahead.

No, this is not the way. We need to strengthen education from preschool to university. Knowledge and education is a right and should not be a commodity – neither as a market school nor for students who have come here to Sweden to contribute and take part in Swedish education. Within the framework of higher education, we in Vänsterpartiet present a number of proposals to broaden the opportunities and secure the right to education.

The current resource allocation system results in the programs receiving funding governed by a price tag, where different programs receive different grants. We in Vänsterpartiet believe that these price tags need to be reviewed and that the funding system needs to be redesigned so that the funding follows the needs of the universities and programs and changes in costs. Pending a more comprehensive change, we propose an increase of all price tags by 1,000 kronor per full-time student to the higher education institutions. Therefore, we believe that the grant should be increased by 324 million kronor.

Furthermore, it is the case that just as for the rest of the public sector, the price and wage recalculation model is subject to productivity deductions. Every year, a small part of the budget is therefore deducted as a saving, approximately, so that one can become more and more efficient every year. The idea is that everything that is state-owned, or common, should be run as if it were a company. But this is not a company. These are our universities and colleges. They have a different function than what private companies have. We believe that this deduction must be removed. By removing it, one can achieve a long-term impact on the appropriations but also a different view on the role of higher education in society.

One of the most important prerequisites for making knowledge and education accessible to more people is a student support system that provides social and economic security for students. Student grants ensure that more people gain access to higher education, regardless of social class or background. But there are obstacles here as well. Many who actually have the grades or the will to study further still do not do so. We want to see a change in the loan conditions in order to be able to bridge the obstacles that exist.

An obstacle that I choose to highlight here is that the student support system has been changed several times, with the consequence that the economic risk has been shifted from the state to the individual in several stages. This does not mean that the skewed recruitment decreases; rather, it is the opposite.

We want to expand the possibilities for foundation years. Foundation years fulfill an important function in offering eligibility-granting studies in a higher education environment. Experience from the universities also shows that those who have completed a foundation year manage subsequent education better than those who come directly from upper secondary school.

We also mean that the higher education entrance exam must become accessible for students with disabilities. Furthermore, the higher education entrance exam is underfunded. But the underfunding – or the question of accessibility – should not be borne by the students. Therefore, we are allocating an extra 20 million to the higher education entrance exam.

Through research, new knowledge is created. This knowledge is important for developing the economy, creating jobs, improving welfare, and creating an ecologically and socially sustainable society. Research needs to be close to education, as it leads to development and enhancement of the quality of both. Therefore, increased support for research is needed.

Vänsterpartiet supports a coherent research policy and stands behind the ambitions for an equal academy and research that is less dependent on external research grants. We therefore want to allocate 500 million in 2024 and increase to 1 billion in 2025 by strengthening the basic grants.

Finally, I want to bring up something that is close to my heart, namely increased support for animal-free research methods. Many times it is pointed out that animal experiments are expensive, and they are. Animal experiments involve breeding, personnel, facilities, and the tests that the animals must undergo. But it is also about what animal experiments do to us as a society. Every time experiments are conducted, we expose the animals to great suffering, and every time a breeding animal must produce another laboratory animal. In Sweden, it concerns approximately 300,000 animals every year, excluding all animals used by Swedish companies via foreign laboratories. Therefore, we must expand our work by prioritizing and making animal-free research methods the standard wherever possible.

Finally, I want to send a greeting to all children and young people in disadvantaged areas. You have heard the news about visitation zones and about how we are pointed out as society's problem. At the same time, that which we own collectively in society receives fewer resources. Because that is what it is about. It is not about creating a more equal society; it is about it being more important to strengthen the rich's economy and reduce the opportunities for some. But regardless of whether you grow up in Skärholmen, Gottsunda, or Rosengård, you should have the same opportunities and rights as everyone else. That is Vänsterpartiet's policy.

(Applause)

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

Amanda Lind (MP)

Madam Speaker! It feels very fine to conclude this year's budget debates with a speech about two of the perhaps most important things we have, namely the children and the culture.

Culture has an irreplaceable value for us humans and for our society. Some parts can be measured in the form of better health, strengthened learning, increased export revenues and a stronger tourism industry to give a few examples. But culture also has irreplaceable and immeasurable values that do not so easily let themselves be captured in statistics, such as those we experience when we sink into a book, when we sing together or when we gain new insights and reflections after a visit to a museum or to a theater performance. Tomas Tranströmer speaks of it as something that touches people's depths, as if inside us "arch after arch opens infinitely".

Madam Speaker! School is the place where all children get the opportunity to encounter culture and their own creativity on equal terms, where neither the parents' wallet, education level, cultural interest, or for that matter the size of the bookshelves at home becomes decisive. That means so much.

We have probably all felt it at some point or seen it in the eyes of children we know. I am talking about the joy when one has created something with one's hands, the pride when one has cracked the code, or a particularly memorable cultural experience that one simply must tell about at home – when those arches open up.

This, Madam Speaker, is what I and the Green Party want all children in Sweden to experience. But for that, both reforms and economic priorities are required.

Now, I do not intend to be too polemical in this post. I believe that many here in the chamber may be longing to conclude today's debate. I will therefore content myself with stating that these are not the large cultural investments that we see in the government's budget, neither in the education area nor in the culture budget. This is extra dangerous, especially in times of recession.

Madam Speaker! Miljöpartiet argues that a holistic approach needs to be taken regarding culture in schools. Skapande skola is a good reform, but it should be reviewed so that all children get the opportunity to participate and not just schools with particularly passionate teachers. Aesthetic subjects should be present in all upper secondary programs to strengthen the educational journey for everyone. Singing and music in preschool needs to be given more space.

A low-hanging fruit, which I assume the government will include in next year's budget, is staffed school libraries, as access to staffed school libraries is today deeply unequal. Only 46 percent of the country's school and high school students today have access to a staffed school library.

Madam Speaker! Miljöpartiet was proactive in ensuring that an investigation into staffed school libraries would be commissioned. We ensured that there are funds in the 2022 budget to be able to begin the reform, and we have also allocated funds for this in our shadow budget. Unfortunately, the investigation has now sat in the Ministry of Education for over a year without any decisions being made.

It is positive that the new government has the ambition to continue to strengthen reading in schools. It is also positive that school libraries are actually mentioned in the Tidö Agreement. But it says nowhere that the school libraries shall be staffed.

A few days before Christmas Eve, I nevertheless choose to be hopeful. I know that several of the government parties opened up for legislation during the election campaign. The Minister for Culture has stated that children's reading is a high-priority issue, and the other day in the speaker's chair, the Liberal chairman of the Education Committee stated that the School Library Inquiry is good and should essentially be carried out.

Madam Speaker! I find it difficult to see that there would be anything deeply party-dividing in wanting to ensure that all children have access to trained staff who can guide the children into the world of reading. Let us, my friends, take this step during the coming year!

With this, I would like to take the opportunity to wish all members here in the chamber and all staff in the Riksdag a very good and restful Christmas, hopefully with good cultural and reading experiences!

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(Decisions were made under § 17.)

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