Fundamentals of education

Fredrik Malm (L)

Mr. Speaker! In this matter, we are dealing with the Education Committee's report 6, and there, a hundred petitions from the general motion period in the Riksdag in the autumn are addressed, concerning among other things the school's values, safety, specific subjects and knowledge areas, and a good deal of other things.

Let me begin, Mr. Speaker, by saying that Swedish schools face very great challenges. How shall more students reach the knowledge goals? How shall schools become more equal? How shall we get more qualified, skilled, and engaged teachers? How shall we increase safety, calm, and peace in schools and curb truancy, rowdiness, violence, and harassment? How shall we help the students who need more support, and how shall we support those who are high-performing and do not receive sufficient challenges in school today?

There are no quick solutions for how we lift up Swedish school, and there are also no simple solutions. Those who believe there are have neither understood the extent of the challenges nor how an operation as extensive as Swedish school, with so many principals, regulatory frameworks, distribution systems, and employees, can be changed. What is required is a series of reforms and a continuous, laborious effort over many years to raise Swedish school to once again become a world-class school. It is about managing the challenges I have already mentioned and many more in addition.

Swedish school must return to becoming a knowledge school. The focus must be teacher-led instruction of high quality with a focus on knowledge results and high-quality textbooks in an environment characterized by calm and peace, order and tidiness, that students follow the rules that apply and that teachers have a work environment that makes them feel well and want to develop in the job. Furthermore, parents shall take responsibility for that their children behave.

This will require a higher degree of rule-governance, a clearer focus on order and tidiness, larger investments in textbooks, and clearer leadership in Swedish schools. The goal must be that all students reach the knowledge goals and that all schools maintain a high quality. That is not the case today. Unfortunately, it is a long way from that.

What will, however, need to take a step back, Mr. Speaker, is the extensive focus on digitalization, especially at young ages, the all-too extensive administrative part of the teachers' work, vague ideas about removing homework and the F grade, or that teacher-led instruction would be something old-fashioned and mossy, as well as schools that compete with flashy concepts and advertising campaigns but do not focus on quality.

Fundamentally, Swedish school needs state ownership again. In the longer perspective, this is the most important piece of the puzzle to guarantee equality in Swedish school. Three decades of municipal ownership have worsened the knowledge results. We have eroded the status of the teaching profession and created unreasonable imbalances in resource distribution. Many municipalities have not taken the responsibility required for their school - either because they have not prioritized this or because they have not had the capacity to be able to prioritize this.

Creating equality in Swedish schools, Mr. Speaker, does not mean that resources necessarily have to be distributed equally. Equality is about equal opportunities, not equal economic outcomes. Swedish school is already compensatory today through, for example, socioeconomic redistribution, supplementary amounts, extra support for those students who need it, leisure activities, and a good deal of other things. But Swedish school will need to become even more compensatory because the conditions differ as much as they do. It is about, for example, more smaller teaching groups, more special education teachers, increased opportunities for schooling during holidays for the students who need it, and that more children in vulnerable areas attend preschool.

One way to increase equity in education is to invest in high-quality textbooks. This government is doing that. This year, from the state side, we are investing almost 700 million kronor in targeted support for textbooks, and in the coming years, 500 million kronor per year.

It is interesting to put this into perspective. During 2021, Mr. Speaker, a student in Swedish school received, according to the latest figures, textbooks in all subjects for an average of 850 kronor. That is, therefore, 70 kronor a month. That is less than what a basic subscription on Netflix costs. Compared to our neighboring countries, we are significantly lower.

The new money that is now being added corresponds to approximately 500 kronor extra per student for this year. The headmasters can apply for this support, but they may not allocate fewer resources to textbooks and teaching materials than they have done over the last three years. One cannot, therefore, reduce the municipal grants and compensate for that saving with state subsidies; instead, the money must go towards more textbooks. It is new money; it is additional support to be able to purchase textbooks.

There are very strong reasons for this initiative. Textbooks in school improve learning. They raise the quality of teaching, make it easier for parents to help their children with schoolwork, and reduce the workload for teachers who spend dozens of hours every term producing their own teaching materials, which furthermore are not quality-assured in the way that a textbook is.

More textbooks are also a prerequisite for reducing screen time in school. Cognitive research shows that children learn better when they read in a book, and anyone who has handled an iPad or a computer knows that it is easy to get distracted. Our children need less screen time. They need more reading and writing with paper and pen.

But I admit that it would have been best if the municipalities, which have the responsibility for this, had prioritized textbooks more highly. Then the government would not have needed to make this extra investment. But since this area is so neglected, this investment is absolutely necessary.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, there are more questions linked to textbooks that are now being prepared in the Government Offices. This follows from the investigation conducted a few years ago by Gustav Fridolin, the former Minister of Education. It was an investigation, but it resulted in two reports – one on the role of school libraries and one on teaching materials. I am basically positive about that investigation, I want to say, and I hope that the government will as soon as possible come with proposals to the Riksdag so that we can implement the changes. It concerns, among other things, definitions in legislation and such things.

With this said, I would like to move for the approval of the proposal in the report.

(Applause)

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

Aylin Fazelian (S)

Mr. Speaker! The report we are debating today includes motions on mother tongue instruction.

Mr. Speaker! I am concerned about what this government will do with our students' right to mother tongue instruction. The Tidö Agreement has indeed landed on that the negative effects of mother tongue instruction shall be reviewed. It is de facto rhetoric that one has bought from SD.

What negative effects are being referred to then? Is it that the children get a more secure cultural identity? Is it that children who are strong in their mother tongue also perform better in other subjects, such as English and Swedish?

There is great potential to strengthen mother tongue instruction in Sweden; that is something I am the first to sign on to. But it is SD rhetoric that mother tongue instruction would be harmful. There is plenty of research, plenty of research in Sweden and internationally, which states the great benefits. One only has to search on Google.

My question to Fredrik Malm is whether his government will yield to SD's demand to remove mother tongue instruction if the de facto politically appointed inquiry were to propose it.

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Mr. Speaker! I thank you very much for the question.

This activity is regulated today, Mr. Speaker. In what we have agreed upon and in the Tidö Agreement, nothing is mentioned about mother tongue instruction being harmful or anything of the sort. That is Social Democratic rhetoric. It states that an investigation should be conducted into whether it can have negative consequences. This would, for example, be if the mother tongue instruction were to encroach on the learning of Swedish in some way or take lesson time from other subjects. If that happens, then it is not good.

I would not be particularly worried about this. Sweden has had mother tongue instruction, which was previously called home language, for many years.

Furthermore, certain requirements are set. It is not just about whether one's parents speak the language, but one must also speak the language at home. It is also required that one has certain basic skills in the mother tongue in order to be able to participate in the teaching.

There are other things one can look at as well, for example how the teaching materials look in mother tongue instruction. I have previously received indications that there has occurred mother tongue instruction where they had textbooks from the home country and the home country does not have quite the same view as Sweden on which social order is most suitable. It may be for that very reason that these people find themselves in Sweden - because they were forced to flee the home country.

There are surely things and matters that one can look at in this, but I would not be particularly worried.

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

Aylin Fazelian (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Fredrik Malm, for the answer!

One would like to be reassured when listening to this debate. But if one is a bit more informed and has also read the Tidö Agreement and understands what the political majorities look like in this government, one becomes worried.

The Sweden Democrats nod in agreement. That is also interesting.

De facto, it states in the Tidö Agreement that mother tongue instruction shall be reviewed, and it is emphasized that it is the negative effects that shall be investigated. In that case, one does not start from the research, but it is highly political.

What the largest party in this government basis wants is clear. It is stated in the report that we are debating today. Mother tongue instruction shall be phased out. It shall disappear. That is, in black and white, what the largest party in this government basis thinks. Then it is not strange that many of us are worried.

My question to Fredrik Malm remains. If it is the Sweden Democrats' demand that mother tongue instruction be removed and if the investigation proposes it, for it could be the case that the Sweden Democrats have an opinion on who the investigator becomes, will Fredrik Malm be able to ensure that the right to mother tongue instruction for our children and students in Sweden remains? Can he guarantee me that?

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Mr. Speaker! To begin with, there is nothing in the Tidö Agreement that says that mother tongue instruction shall be removed. There is nothing that says it is harmful. What is stated there is that it shall be reviewed if it has negative consequences.

It is clear that one also looks at something in terms of its positive consequences. But it does not happen as often in politics that one does that, I can say, and I do not think one needs to look at the positive consequences particularly much. It is better to be able to speak two languages than one, I think. It is better to be able to speak three than two, moreover, and if one can speak ten, that is absolutely excellent. But if the mother tongue instruction has consequences for the other instruction, for example if one moves from lessons in Swedish that one needs to instead read one's mother tongue which one anyway brings with them from home, that is not particularly good. It is probably good if one can look at those parts. But I would, as I said, not be particularly concerned about this.

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Mr. Speaker! It was a pleasure to hear Member Malm in the speaker's chair. There should be less flashiness in Swedish school. There are no simple solutions.

It would have been welcome if one perceived that is how the government's policy works. That is not quite how I perceive it. But I assume that this means the Liberals from now on will not say that Swedish school is saved if we just nationalize it. That would have been a bit too much of a simplification, so I assume that is over in the current situation.

I actually want to ask a question about something else. The Member of Parliament said that it is "flum" (vague/pseudo-intellectual) to remove the grade F, and that those who discuss the problems with today's F are "flummiga" (vague).

There is a quite active school debater named Mannerheim. I do not perceive her as vague. Apparently, Member Malm does.

I do not perceive the chairwoman of the Swedish Union of Teachers, Åsa Fahlén, as a vague person, directly. But apparently, Fredrik Malm does.

All these school researchers and school leaders say that there are problems with today's system and how F functions. My question is therefore: If we are to have a less messy school debate and a bit more focus on the fact that this is actually complicated and that there are no simple solutions, I wonder if Member Malm sees that there are problems linked to the grade F, the grading system we have at the present time, and the consequences the F grade gives when it is awarded.

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Mr. Speaker! Niels Paarup-Petersen takes the rostrum and argues that there are no simple solutions - and then he proposes exactly such a solution: to simply remove the grade "fail". Then the matter is settled, so to speak.

It is not that simple. It is not the case that students learn more in school because one removes the possibility of failing. If one removes the grade "fail," it does not mean that those students have suddenly become passed or have reached the learning goals we have.

The truth is that we must have high ambitions for Swedish school. We must have objectives and goals that the students are to achieve. Armand Duplantis jumps 6.22 in pole vault, I believe that is it. How high would he have jumped if he hadn't had a bar? One could ask that. It would have been impossible to find out how high he would have jumped, and he would not have been able to see if he jumped higher one time compared to the time before. When he clears a height, he also raises the bar a little more. That is exactly how Swedish school must also function.

It is clear that one can very well discuss the different grading levels. One can discuss the ranges in between, and one can discuss a number of different things. It is not the case that these are any stone tablets from Mount Sinai, but it is something that politicians and even Skolverket can arrive at in different ways. Previously we have had four levels, and at some point we have had five. Sometimes we have letters, sometimes we have numbers and so on. But fundamentally, it is such that we must have certain goals the student needs to achieve in order to be able to move on to the next step, and therefore this grade was needed.

One takes a shortcut if one thinks that one helps children and young people by removing the F grade. It only means that these children will be moved up to the next stage, and the next, and then face problems further ahead instead. It is much better to provide support early - to be able to identify these students and give them more help.

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Mr. Speaker! I can state that the path from being less flashy to continuing in the same style as always was approximately five meters long.

I have not even suggested that we should remove the grade F. I have not suggested it. I asked the member Fredrik Malm if he sees that there are actually problems with how today's grading system is defined, what makes one receive the grade F, and the consequences of it. Does he see that there are problems with it? That was my question. I did not say that the grade F should be removed.

I would, however, very much like to ask the question again. Let's take Duplantis; it is a fantastically beautiful metaphor! This is how today's grading system works: If Duplantis were to fall once while running to jump and break a new world record - which according to my phone is 6.22, but a new record may have come since February - he would not be allowed to jump again. That is how the school system works. If you fall once, you are not allowed to jump again, because that is what gives the grade F.

This means that you are judged based on your absolute worst performance, not on how good you are generally. To get the grade E, you must deliver the right thing every single time. It is your worst effort to date that determines whether you are allowed to jump again and move forward.

I believe that there are opportunities to improve the system, and therefore I ask again whether Fredrik Malm sees that there are certain problems with the way this functions and if he sees that there is a value in discussing how the grade F functions, against what background it is given and the consequences of it as it functions today.

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Mr. Speaker! As I said in my previous reply to Niels Paarup-Petersen, one can very well discuss the different steps; it is not just about F but also about the other letters before that - E, D, C, B and A. It is clear that one can discuss it. One can discuss whether the spans are too large or too small.

The Riksdag previously made decisions regarding exactly this—that the teacher shall make the combined assessment during the grading so that it is not the worst performance that influences and determines the grades. But I would say this, Mr. Speaker: My greatest concern is actually not the construction of the different steps in the grading scale, but my greatest concern is that 15,000 students leave grade 9 every year without getting into upper secondary school. It doesn't matter what the grade they receive is called, because those students have obviously not reached the goals that are required.

Then one can choose, which I have now understood that Niels Paarup-Petersen does not want but which other parties in his opposition want, to remove the grade F and simply pass these students on to upper secondary school. In upper secondary school, all programs shall then be university-preparatory, and after that, the students shall enter university. The problem is that this is not a good model for Swedish school. It is not a good model for Swedish school that we in that way move the great challenge, i.e., that students should receive basic knowledge, higher and higher up in age.

Actually, we need to go in the opposite direction, and we need to implement the support much earlier. To implement the support much earlier, more screening, more diagnostic tests, and more measurable tests and other things were needed. It is about being able to identify these students better and being able to implement the support. That, I would say, is the most important thing of all.

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

Aylin Fazelian (S)

Mr. Speaker! This debate concerns 118 motions from the general motion period that concern fundamental issues regarding education. I will make some observations on matters that are important positions for us Social Democrats.

First, however, I must say the following: The Education Act clarifies, among other things, that education shall be designed in accordance with basic democratic values and human rights, such as the inviolability of human life, the individual's freedom and privacy, the equal value of all people, equality, and solidarity between people. The education shall be based on a scientific foundation and proven experience.

The education that our children receive in school is the prerequisite for personal development and for participation in a democratic society. School also lays the foundation for the entire society's prosperity in the future. But if we are to live up to the portal paragraphs of the Education Act, which I have just read out, and the goals and visions that we have adopted for the best of our children and students, we cannot accept the systemic failures that exist in Swedish schools and which lead to increasing inequality and segregation.

In the report we are debating today, the issue of religious free schools is raised, among other things. In a government position, the Social Democratic-led government took the initiative to introduce clearer requirements and stricter rules for religious free schools. But we do not believe that is enough. We believe that religious influence does not belong in school at all. All schools in Sweden should be good schools with a focus on knowledge and education - not religious influence.

Nevertheless, we know from among others Säpo that there are links between school activities and Islamist, violent environments. We also receive alarm reports about Christian independent schools that deny girls sex education. It is completely unacceptable, and therefore we Social Democrats want to ban religious independent schools. We want to do it in a way that also takes into account the international commitments that Sweden has entered into and the conditions of national minorities to maintain and develop their culture.

School should be a place for students to exchange ideas and thoughts. School should be a place where students grow as human beings by socializing with and learning from others with completely different backgrounds. There, the bank director's child shall meet the worker's child, and the child from a Christian family shall meet the child from a Muslim family. In that school, all our children can grow and develop as human beings.

Mr. Speaker! It is a very serious development that reading has decreased in all ages for some time. The Social Democratic-led government implemented a series of measures to promote reading among young people. The curricula were changed so that reading aloud became part of the preschool's activities. Hundreds of millions have been invested in competence development for preschool teachers and teachers in reading and writing development within the framework of Läslyftet. To continue strengthening reading and writing skills is crucial for knowledge results to continue to increase. Therefore, we Social Democrats believe that reading promotion measures need to continue to be implemented.

Good learning materials are also crucial for our children's and young people's learning, not least for those who do not come from homes accustomed to studying. Despite this, access to learning materials is unequal, and many schools have outdated learning materials. In many schools, teachers are forced to copy compendiums, which takes time away from teaching, reduces equality, and impairs parents' opportunity to get a coherent picture of the teaching.

That is why we commissioned an inquiry which was presented in 2021, with proposals on what the state's role should be when it comes to teaching materials in Swedish schools. Among the proposals were the establishment of a teaching materials board and a state production support, as well as that the Education Act should be clarified regarding students' access to books and learning tools. These proposals are important. Therefore, we Social Democrats allocate both resources and will in our alternative to implement these proposals.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden's schools and our children and students face a tough time ahead against the background of the economic crisis. I am sincerely worried that SD's government is pursuing a policy that will increase the problems in Swedish schools. In the government's spring budget, there will be no new money for the municipalities, despite the fact that the school sector needs large supplements. The trade union Sveriges Lärare has reacted to the right-wing government's announcement with the words: "The lack of necessary resources is a betrayal of children, students and teachers that will be felt for a long time to come." It is clear that SD and the government are letting the children pay the price for the crisis.

At the same time, the proposals in the Tidö Agreement regarding the school area are directly hostile to children, which several children's rights organizations have noted. In the school area, mother tongue instruction is to be reviewed, presumably to be abolished as the Sverigedemokraterna want. Add to that that the right-wing government wants a mandatory reporting obligation against children and a removal of students' influence and co-determination over rules of order, which also risks that the legitimacy and compliance of rules of order will decrease. Furthermore, duty and emergency schools are to be established - a sorting school that SD has described shall be a school for students who do not live up to "a minimum requirement for how one behaves".

For us Social Democrats, school policy is instead based on strengthening the support for our children, for their development and learning. We are allocating significantly more resources to schools in our proposals, not least to schools with great challenges.

We demand that society takes back control of the school from the market and from religious forces and that the school should have a greater focus on factual knowledge and clearer and more just grading criteria.

The right to after-school care needs to be expanded, and teachers need to receive the support they need, ranging from reduced administrative burdens to the right to professional development and access to high-quality teaching materials in instruction.

Mr. Speaker! I naturally stand behind all our reservations, but for the sake of time, I move for the approval of only reservations 10, 20 and 24.

(Applause)

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Mr. Speaker! Let me begin by saying that I would gladly have seen that we would not need any emergency schools in Sweden. The problem is only that we do. The problem is that we have a situation in Swedish schools today where we are forced to introduce that type of measure.

It is a failing grade for Swedish school. It is also a failing grade for Swedish school policy and social development over many years that we have reached a situation where insecurity can have such consequences that students can be forced to be placed in such schools. However, it is not a permanent solution. It should not be and cannot be.

When it comes to, for example, students who have been very violent and create an insecurity for other students at the school, perhaps the police need to be deployed to the school often. But even those students have a right to education from pedagogical staff, which must be ensured.

We have the situation we have in our schools. Some of the measures that Aylin Fazelian is horrified by are unfortunately completely necessary, given the situation we have now. This week, a student was assaulted outside a school in Eskilstuna. There have been other situations where people have walked straight into classrooms during class time and, for example, robbed the school of computers. There have been attacks and even a teacher who has been killed.

Mr. Speaker! When one speaks about resources for schools, one must be aware that 92 percent of the resources for Swedish schools come from the municipalities, while 8 percent come from here. It is actually the municipalities that have responsibility for Swedish schools. I welcome it if Aylin Fazelian wants to join the Liberals' view and bring the responsibility back here.

In nine of Sweden's ten largest municipalities, it is Aylin Fazelian's party that governs. It is you who are cutting the appropriations in those municipalities.

In this speech, Robert Stenkvist (SD) concurred.

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

Aylin Fazelian (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is a poor grade for the Liberals that they have given up on Sweden's children and students.

The best violation is the one that never happens. What needs to happen is that our students, our children, receive the support they need in school. The way forward is not SD's line of sorting children into different schools. What emergency and out-of-hours schools are, we do not know. It is frightening that the Liberals are now pursuing a policy of a sorting school.

Mr. Speaker! I think it is absurd that Fredrik Malm suggests that the resources from the state to the welfare system are not that important. It is crucial! In the government's spring budget, they do not add a single extra krona to the welfare system when our schools have enormous challenges given the cost increases that are occurring.

Schools and municipalities testify that children need to eat more of the food in school because they are hungry. They do not get enough food at home. Then the government comes with cuts to the already pressured school. Already pressured children shall also see their teachers being laid off. Resources matter so clearly. It is irresponsible of this government and not least of Fredrik Malm's party, which once called itself a school party, to turn its back on our children and students.

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Mr. Speaker! Let me take an example. A number of years ago, there was a student at a high school in Stockholm city who severely assaulted another student. The student who was assaulted was, moreover, attending his first day at the school. The student who committed the assault was suspended for two to three weeks by the school's principal. During that time, he was at home. He received no emergency schooling. Then he returned after three weeks, and what he did then was to stab another student to death.

That this student should be moved to an emergency school is, according to Aylin Fazelian, to segregate that student.

I believe we need some perspective on the situation in Swedish schools. We have cases with students who act in such a way that they strike fear into an entire school.

There are students who act in such a way that it results in constant police matters and students who eventually cause the school management, staff, and other students to consider the situation unmanageable. In that case, one must in some instances be able to implement measures that ensure the safety of the other students is strengthened and that there is an organized operation for the student who acts in this way.

This is not about sorting children and young people. It is about dealing with a brutal reality that exists in many schools in Sweden. I would have wished that it wasn't necessary, but we find ourselves where we find ourselves. We have certainly at all times had cases of incidents, and one must be able to act to handle such situations.

Mr. Speaker! Regarding the second question, nine out of ten municipalities are governed by the Social Democrats, and 90 percent of the resources for the schools come from the municipalities. They should really invest more in the school instead of blaming the government.

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

Aylin Fazelian (S)

Mr. Speaker! We have recently passed a bill on safety and order. It seems Fredrik Malm has forgotten. It was incredibly important for us Social Democrats to pass changes in the school area that can actually counteract such situations as Fredrik Malm describes.

It has been about teachers and school staff having extended powers to enter a situation physically if so would be required. It has also been about clarifying their right to intervene in cases of harassment and breaches of order, and about principals getting safer support in being able to temporarily suspend students or decide on suspension or placement within or outside the school. It is thus a series of measures that exist today and are possible for the school and the principal to take for those students for whom it is required.

Liberalerna choose instead to agree with the Sweden Democrats' "give up" policy where students are sorted based on a minimum requirement of how they behave. What will be the definitions of which children behave "correctly" or "badly" according to the Sweden Democrats? We do not know. But we know that it is incredibly dangerous to start going down that path and sort students into different types of schools. The way forward is resources for the school so that they can work preventatively, give students support, and give teachers, educators, and principals the opportunity to intervene.

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

Noria Manouchi (M)

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating the Education Committee's report Basic Education. It contains a wide range of issues, and the committee chairman Fredrik Malm has accounted for several of them. I would like to focus on what I believe will be completely decisive for Swedish schools in both the short and long term.

First, I want to mention some figures. According to the Swedish Crime Prevention Council, 50 percent of students in grade 9 are victims of crime. From Friends' latest report, it appears that every fourth child has been subjected to some form of serious violence in school during the past year. Closer to 10 percent had to seek medical care for their injuries. One in five reports of threats and violence received by the Swedish Work Environment Authority was submitted by a teacher, and one in four teachers has been threatened by a student.

According to Friends, the safety work ongoing in Swedish schools has been deprioritized during recent years, and I agree with that analysis. Actually, Mr. Speaker, it is very strange that over time this has not been one of the by far most important issues for school politicians across the country, that the media has not published scandal headlines every other day, and that parents, students, and teachers have not marched through the country's cities. One can ask how it could have become normal that half of the students go to school with a lump in their stomachs and half go there with clenched fists.

Shouldn't children be allowed to learn what is right and what is wrong? Should it really be so that the law of the jungle applies, that no one stands up in the lower grades and that in the higher grades no one dares anymore? There are many who testify to how norm-breaking behavior has been cemented at an early age and that a culture has been established based on the strongest surviving. It becomes so when one student's right to safety cannot be guaranteed because instead, the other student's right to hit is ensured.

It is sad to have to describe such a gloomy reality, but we must face it. It is, fortunately, fully possible to break this downward spiral. It will, however, require a great deal of work, but with a government that has made school one of the six most prioritized areas, we can now finally begin this work.

In the Education Act, the principal's primary responsibility to maintain safety and study environment shall be written in. The principal shall be obliged to move students when it is necessary. The goal is that it shall never again be the crime victim who is forced to change schools.

We shall strengthen the powers and responsibilities of principals and teachers. Clear rules of order shall become well known to both students and parents. The parents' responsibility in this cannot be overemphasized. To ensure that the children learn the rules, that the children learn to respect their teachers and their classmates, and that the children come to school rested and fed – that is the parents' responsibility.

Something that parents, however, should not have to worry about is that their children are in an unsafe environment during the time they are in school. Unauthorized persons shall no longer have the right to enter schools or schoolyards. Day schools with skilled teachers and well-educated staff shall apply for students who repeatedly commit violence against teachers and students. If a crime is committed, it must actually be reported. It shall be a duty imposed on adults within the school. When one speaks with the common man, they are surprised that it does not already look this way, but now it is finally going to be put in place. Better late than never!

We also need to take measures that help children who are suffering not to become aggressive. All schools should have a preventive work against mental ill-health based on proven methods and science. The health talks must also include mental health. It should be just as natural in Swedish schools to meet the counselor as it is to meet the school nurse. Children who carry anger or who easily become so angry that they boil over need to be caught before it is too late.

Mr. Speaker! The Moderates view the situation that students are in today very seriously. That children are forced – as is actually done, via compulsory schooling – to be at the most common crime scene without us doing everything in our power to ensure their safety is a reality that I will not accept.

I vote in favor of the proposals in the report.

(Applause)

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Mr. Speaker! For the sake of time, I move for approval only of the Sweden Democrats' reservation number 25. We have several, but we choose that one.

In this report, Basic Education, there are many good proposals - everything from increased quality of teaching materials to safer schooling with, among other things, emergency schools that give principals the opportunity to safeguard safety and studies in the school. These are things that the old government has completely overlooked and literally turned a blind eye to for eight years.

Now we have a new government basis, and then we will take action on the problems directly and begin our journey toward making Swedish school good again. The journey will take time, and we will encounter obstacles. But we will do our very best. Swedish school shall flourish again, as it did during my own schooling. It is something that I and the government basis would like to offer this and future generations.

Mr. Speaker! Values and culture are important ingredients in a society, and so also in the school. We Sweden Democrats particularly safeguard the classically Swedish values, such as ethics and morality, where camaraderie, honesty, cooperation, and consideration for one another are central components. The school shall also teach the meaning of democracy and respect for others' opinions as well as stimulate critical and independent thinking.

Today we unfortunately see certain deviations in schools where teachers take partisan political positions during lesson time, which my children have happened to experience a number of times. This behavior must be removed, as it violates the democratic rules of the game. Our school shall be neutral - period.

Mr. Speaker! An improvement in the quality of school materials is currently being prepared within the Ministry of Education, which is very good. We Sweden Democrats would like there to be a standardized selection of textbooks to choose from for each subject and course. These should naturally be of high quality, and they should preferably be printed, neutral, and fact-based.

A minimum level for costs for learning materials per pupil and year should also be established. What it should be set at, however, must be shown by an investigation. An investigation conducted just over a year ago showed that the average Swedish municipality today spends approximately 650 kronor per pupil and year on learning materials, but every fifth school spends less than 400 kronor per pupil and year. That is not much; it is a quarter of a Netflix subscription. By comparison, it can be mentioned that in Norway they invest an average of 1,050 kronor and in Finland 1,450 kronor. Now it has become a bit more due to inflation and other things.

I am also pleased that the government, together with us Sverigedemokrater, is already investing 685 million kronor in high-quality teaching materials. Very little was done in this area by the previous government, so now there is hope for Sweden's school leaders and students.

Mr. Speaker! A few months ago, the government tasked Skolverket with introducing centrally graded national tests in four subjects. This is good, and many parties have also been positive about this being introduced.

Furthermore, however, work remains on which criteria grades should be based on. There is, among other things, a lot to do in the practical and aesthetic subjects, where far too much emphasis is placed on theoretical knowledge. Students are expected to be able to argue for their performance and analyze the same. We believe that it is the practice and mastery of the craft itself that should constitute the basis for grades. Let those students who are skilled at this be given the opportunity for a high grade! I believe that many students would have been happy with such a change.

Mr. Speaker! Mother tongue instruction is a frequently debated reform from the 70s, my time in school. The purpose was to preserve one's mother tongue and culture for a potential move back to the home country. We had large-scale labor migration at that time. The target group was children of labor migrants, and they constituted approximately 5 percent of the students in the school.

Today the situation is completely different. A third of all students today are entitled to mother tongue instruction. It costs a lot of money, which I have not heard anyone talk about. For some it might be free, but the municipalities have a cost of approximately 2,400 million kronor per year. Yes, you heard right: 2,400 million kronor!

Today, our society is very segregated, and different cultures prevail in different areas. This applies particularly in my hometown Malmö. This is a deficiency that one should not allow to increase through mother tongue instruction, but rather the opposite.

That the language learning itself should strengthen other areas is highly doubtful. I do not claim the opposite, however. In some studies, often with different conditions than Sweden or the Nordic countries, it can show a marginal improvement, but not so great that it can be considered very valuable. Other studies show no difference.

I believe it was in 2006 that they in our neighboring country Denmark conducted the largest study of mother tongue ever. It showed no or very small deviations between the group that chose mother tongue instruction and those who abstained. The result was that they removed the state statutory requirement for mother tongue instruction in Denmark, a country where the conditions should be roughly the same as in Sweden, if not exactly.

For the thousands of millions of kronor that mother tongue instruction costs annually, we can get many things for our school. Millions of schoolbooks, increased teacher salaries, smaller teaching groups, and even strengthened student health are included within the costs of mother tongue instruction.

It is precisely now that extra difficult times are occurring even for our municipalities, which the opposition likes to talk about. Here we offer 2.4 billion kronor - or as I said before: 2,400 million kronor - in lower costs for our municipalities. We can take that directly.

We in the Sweden Democrats consider that mother tongue instruction has served its purpose. On the other hand, we very much welcome that one learns one's mother tongue, but that one does so on one's own initiative.

Mr. Speaker! Finally, I would like to announce that under points 9 and 15 we will first vote on our own proposal, and thereafter we will vote on the committee's proposal.

(Applause)

In this speech, Patrick Reslow and Robert Stenkvist (both SD) concurred.

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

Daniel Riazat (V)

Mr. Speaker! I will address the same issue later in my speech, but I will nevertheless begin this exchange by posing a question that was previously asked of the Liberals regarding what actually applies in the Tidö Agreement. Is mother tongue instruction to be removed, as Jörgen Grubb argued in the rostrum, or is it to be reviewed and developed?

Earlier we heard the Liberal member say that it is not about removing mother tongue instruction. But all of a sudden we hear the Sweden Democrats member say that it should be removed. Is there an agreement, and if so, what does it consist of?

This is actually a rhetorical question because we all know that this is a point that the Sverigedemokraterna have gotten in because of the racism they have stood up for in the chamber and in Sweden during all the years since they were founded. It is about shifting all focus and all policy to a single area, namely people who have the same hair color as I do. It is about always and in all situations trying to shift the focus from that so that it instead is about whether or not it costs to have mother tongue instruction, especially in times when the Sverigedemokraterna are part of the Tidö Agreement group and are carrying out the largest cuts ever within Swedish school.

The Sweden Democrats also speak about the research on this, but the research is very clear, in every case in Sweden. A number of researchers say day after day against the Sweden Democrats in the media on this point. I wonder if Jörgen Grubb can mention exactly which research reports say that mother tongue instruction would have negative consequences for children's learning. I want an answer to that now.

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I will begin by saying that I will refrain from calling anyone else a racist.

(DANIEL RIAZAT (V): Do it!)

I believe I have the floor? I will start over. I will avoid calling anyone else a racist here in the speaker's chair.

Regarding mother tongue instruction, the starting points for us and the Liberals may be slightly different, but we are very much in agreement that an investigation should be conducted on mother tongue instruction. It must be broad, and one must look at the advantages and disadvantages to see if it is worth the money and so on. That is the answer to the question.

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

Daniel Riazat (V)

Mr. Speaker! I believe that even the Speaker, who previously in another role belonged to this coalition, understands that this was not an answer. I ask the question again: Can Jörgen Grubb and the Sverigedemokraterna mention a research study - which is not conducted by the Sverigedemokraterna, like your own white paper - which shows in what way this would have negative consequences for children's learning in the Swedish school? Could Jörgen Grubb answer that? The answer is no, and that is why we heard the non-answer that previously came from Jörgen Grubb.

Additionally, I want to add one thing. The Sweden Democrats want to change laws concerning people with a foreign background. They want to change mother-tongue education, which we will not allow. There will also be other types of racist proposals. Regardless of this, millions of people who speak different languages will live in this country now and in the future. There will be people like me, who speak Persian. There will be people who speak various different languages from all over the world. We will organize these people. They shall also in the future have their right to knowledge and education in their own mother tongues. It does not only strengthen these people, for example me, but it strengthens our entire society in Sweden. It is a society that claims to be democratic and stands up for democratic values.

I advocate that the Sweden Democrats do not only read the curriculum but also internalize what is written in the curriculum. What the children learn in school today is what the Sweden Democrats would have needed to learn, namely that the school's core values are based on human rights, understanding, and humanity. It is about safeguarding the solidarity between people.

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Mr. Speaker! The absolute largest and most realistic study or investigation - one can call it what one wants - that has been conducted regarding mother tongue instruction is from Denmark. It was over 10,000 students who were involved in it. The study resulted in that in 2006 they removed the statutory requirement for mother tongue instruction. I believe I mentioned this in my speech; it is in my papers in any case. It would be good if one listened as well. The study clearly showed that there were very small deviations, regardless of which direction one looked. Therefore, they found no reason to make it a requirement in Denmark to have mother tongue instruction. I do not understand where the problem lies; this makes no difference either way.

Then I also want to point out to the member that neither I nor my colleagues have said that this would be something that is gravely negative. I actually have not heard anyone who has debated mother tongue instruction say that. But one can put in a balance that mother tongue instruction costs money. There are plenty of things that one could do for students that are not negative. We could, for example, say that all students in the Swedish school should receive very nice mobile phones for free. That is certainly nothing that is negative, but it involves an enormous cost for the municipalities. In the other balance there are, as I mentioned, student health, textbooks and smaller teaching groups. It is this that one has to choose between. In broad strokes, this has played out its part. Therefore, we are not particularly constrained if the municipalities are not forced to have mother tongue instruction. It costs 2,400 million kronor every year.

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

Aylin Fazelian (S)

Mr. Speaker! Let me begin by saying that I have looked at the Danish research on mother tongue teaching that Jörgen Grubb refers to. I have it in front of me right now. Here it can be read that the results are not statistically significant and that the results cannot be used for decisions. Jörgen Grubb perhaps should read up a bit better on the research he refers to.

Mr. Speaker! SD has, in the Tidö Agreement, had it pushed through that inspections of schools with a Muslim profile shall increase. I assume at least that it is the Sweden Democrats who have had it pushed through, since it only concerns schools with a Muslim profile.

We Social Democrats do not think that religious influence belongs in Swedish schools at all, regardless of whether it is a Christian independent school or a Muslim independent school. We think it is important that children from different backgrounds meet, that children are given the opportunity to shape their own faith and grow as individuals based on proven experience and science, and that the education is based on everyone's equal value.

We are reached by alarm reports about, for example, Christian free schools, not least in the area I come from, Western Sweden. In these Christian free schools, it is the case that girls are denied the right to sex education and that teachers and students are to stay away from so-called morally dangerous material such as the theory of evolution, divorces, and LGBTQ issues.

My question to Jörgen Grubb is therefore whether he thinks that forced religious influence, as has been observed many times in, for example, Christian independent schools, belongs in Swedish schools?

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Mr. Speaker! We as a party, the Sweden Democrats, have said no to the possibility of new free schools being established that are religious. We have also said that flying inspections, as they may be called, should be conducted at these free schools and other schools. We have not quite received your agreement, but perhaps we will now. That is to say, one should not have to book an appointment in advance. We want to have oversight. We absolutely do not want any religious influence to be able to occur in religious free schools during school hours; instead, the Education Act shall be followed. In that case, it shall take place before or after so that it is optional to participate.

It is very possible that this occurs at both Christian and Muslim schools. The biggest scandals have been at the Muslim independent schools, but perhaps something bad occurs at the Christian independent schools as well. That is what the inspection is to crack down on. If it is sufficiently serious, one should, of course, close the school or in some other way reprimand the operation. There is nothing strange about that. We do not make any distinction between different religions; one simply must behave in order to be able to have these schools. But the major problems have, as stated, existed in Muslim independent schools, including in Western Sweden, near the member's residence. We have all followed the press.

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

Aylin Fazelian (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Jörgen Grubb for the answer. That the Sweden Democrats say that they do not make a distinction between different religions is today's absurdity.

We Social Democrats have ensured that inspections have increased. We have tightened the requirements. We have tightened the controls of religious independent schools. But it is not enough. We want to go further. We want to ban religious independent schools.

Even though Jörgen Grubb says that he does not make a distinction between Muslim and Christian independent schools, it states de facto in the Tidö Agreement that the controls shall increase for schools with a Muslim profile. We think it is important that these controls are carried out. We think it is appalling that there is school activity that is connected with an Islamist environment, which among other things Säpo has stated. One only has to look at the reviews. But it is also the case that there have been repeated alarms regarding Christian independent schools after inspection.

My question remains. It is not included in the Tidö Agreement that Christian independent schools should also be covered by the expanded inspections. I wonder: Are the Sweden Democrats and Jörgen Grubb ready to set aside their Islamophobia to also deal with other schools that impose religious influence on children? Is one ready to put the students first?

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

Jörgen Grubb (SD)

Mr. Speaker! We are constantly putting the students in the first room. That is what I said in my speech, and that is also what my colleagues representing the government said. We together form the government basis. We are now taking a lot of measures that are only about improvement for students and teachers.

You have been tampering with our school for eight years. It has gone worse and worse. I even hear that when you stand in the speaker's chair, you suddenly start talking about good proposals from our side. It was very quiet about that for eight years.

Nothing happened, and there was no workshop. You didn't close any schools. You didn't close any Christian schools, and you didn't close any Muslim schools. You simply did nothing. You stood there completely helpless.

Now it sounds like you are going to be perfectly perfect. Now you want this. I don't understand why you didn't do anything. Now we are trying to do something.

In the common points, we included that one should tighten up extra in Muslim private schools. It is there that the worst incidents have occurred and where the greatest problems have existed.

We have also said that, overall, there should be more inspections. More money has been allocated for more inspections overall in all schools. We have done this. We have talked about it for several years.

You had eight years. Nothing happened in that direction. You are now coming at ten minutes past twelve and talking about: Now we want to do this. It is easy to do that. You had eight years. Why did nothing happen?

I think eight years is a rather long time. Two years is only a quarter of that time. It can be tough to get an investigation. It might take eight years and so on. But it is about eight years, for goodness' sake!

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

Mathias Bengtsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! The school's task is to help all children. It is to create the conditions so that every child can learn as much as possible, that every child can develop as a person and be able to realize their full potential.

Therefore, the school must convey knowledge for a life on the labor market, but the school also needs to convey classical education. It is about understanding our society, our history, our cultural heritage and the valuable virtues and the ethics that have been preserved by Christian and Western tradition. It is at least equally important for developing as a human being.

Without a common basic ethics, a society is created where the strong rule and the weak suffer. Today's debate concerns, among other things, the school's core values, with norms such as the unique and inviolable value of all human beings and solidarity with the vulnerable. That core value has a deep anchoring in Christian ethics and in Western humanism.

The school's responsibility is to anchor that value base among the students by translating the ethical principles into practical action in the work against bullying and rowdiness.

Mr. Speaker! Too many students do not only carry their backpacks on their way to school. They also carry a lump in their stomachs of worry about what will be shouted in the corridor today. Bullying has doubled over the last ten years, according to Friends' report, while the schools' work for safety has decreased.

Social media has contributed to the fact that bullying also follows them home in their phones. For far too many children, the last thing they hear before they fall asleep in the evening is not their parents' words "I love you," but they receive a text message with a hateful message: How can one be so ugly?

Mr. Speaker! This needs to be met on a broad front with active work from the school's side, with skilled teachers who take action and evidence-based anti-bullying programs. But we also need to catch the growing mental ill-health with strengthened school health and care and nursing initiatives.

It concerns, not least, initiatives for safe families. For in families that function and have time, we are loved unconditionally. There, love is not measured in the number of likes or priced by the brand on the shirt. There, we are loved for who we are, not for what we perform or how we look.

Mr. Speaker! Student health is also extremely important. Many are the students who testify how contact with student health was a first step on the journey to feeling better. At the same time, we have far too many testimonies telling of how one gathered the courage to reach out a hand but was met by an out-of-office sign on the school counselor's door.

The government's announced priorities within the school health area are extremely important to strengthen accessibility and strengthen cooperation between school health, health and medical care, and social services so that children and young people receive early and coordinated interventions.

Mr. Speaker! We can observe that Swedish schools have major order problems. Every fifth student in grade 9 does not feel safe in school. It is clear that students who do not feel safe easily fall behind. They have difficulty keeping up with the teaching.

There is obviously a great deal to work on among the students, but unfortunately also among the teachers. Almost half of the secondary school students state that the school staff do not always act when students are violated or treated poorly.

A report from Sveriges kristna råd showing that every other Christian youth experiences being offended for the sake of their faith in school also shows that in a quarter of the cases it is the teacher who offends.

It is completely unacceptable. That as a student one should be mocked, belittled, and questioned by their teacher, to whom one is in a position of dependency, and furthermore in front of one's classmates, no one should have to be subjected to in a society that has signed on to the human rights and freedoms.

Worst of all is perhaps that students in the Swedish Christian Council's investigation have reported that no one cared when they turned to the school for help. That makes the violation double.

Everyone who works in schools must be able to handle, in a professional manner, that there are people with different philosophical and religious convictions, as well as other minority groups. They shall be met with respect, even if one as a teacher or student does not personally share that conviction. It is something that we need to return to and monitor in the continued work. To forbid Christian independent schools, where many of these students have finally found a sanctuary, will never be the solution.

Mr. Speaker! Teachers are important. They are simply crucial for students to feel well. It is all the very skilled teachers we have out in the country who build the school strong. They are teachers with a warm heart and a firm hand who speak about what is right and wrong and how to treat one another. They are the ones who create a school for children to long for. They are the ones who lay the foundation for a safer society in the whole country, a safer Sweden.

School leadership and the teachers' role are the key. But it is also about order and discipline in the classroom and in the corridors. Already today, there should be rules of order in every school. But the students who break the rules of order must also be met with clear consequences.

Today, there is the possibility of seizure of objects, deportation, detention, temporary relocation or, in the worst case, exclusion. That type of measures need to be able to be used even more often and to a greater extent.

There needs to be a clear consequence ladder for what happens in cases of rule violations and disturbances of order. The person who sabotages should themselves be able to participate in repairing the damage. It is perfectly reasonable that, in some cases, the bill is sent home to the parents of the person who sabotaged. There must simply be zero tolerance towards graffiti and vandalism, in the same way as there must be zero tolerance towards bullying and offensive behavior.

That kind of behavior must always result in direct contact with the home so that the parents can take their important parental responsibility. Society is larger than the state. In this case, we are convinced that the families themselves, but also civil society, could contribute more to creating safety in schools in a better way than today.

Mr. Speaker! I move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report.

(Applause)

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

Daniel Riazat (V)

Mr. Speaker! I want to begin by saying that Vänsterpartiet naturally stands behind all our reservations, but so that we do not have an extremely long vote next week, I move for approval only to reservation 26.

Mr. Speaker! Just at this moment, as we discuss the report titled Grundläggande om utbildning, schoolgirls in Iran are fighting for their lives because they have once again been poisoned by the despicable dictatorial state power - a regime that we all hope will be destroyed once and for all. At the same time, Palestinian children are struggling due to attacks that violate international law from the Israeli apartheid regime.

When we now discuss the everyday life for children in the Swedish school, we must not forget what is stated in the curriculum regarding solidarity. We should therefore remember all children's fundamental rights. The international solidarity that children learn in school is something that I hope more people in the Swedish Parliament's chamber will also learn one day.

Mr. Speaker! The history of all democratic societies is the history of the view on people's right to and access to knowledge. Should education and knowledge be a right for all, with an intrinsic value that is not solely about making oneself employable for employers who are never satisfied, but also about being allowed to develop from one's own potential - a strong foundation for everyone, with compensatory parts for those who need it extra much? Or should it be a system that knocks out, that sorts, that segregates, and that splits?

The Left has always stood for the former and the Right for the latter. Therefore, we must do everything to stop the Right from destroying the view on knowledge and education. But we must also stop the Right so that they cannot slaughter the school's budget any further.

The bourgeois government has recently announced that it will provide so little money to the municipalities for school activities that a large majority of the country's municipalities will be forced to make larger and greater cuts than previously estimated. It is something that the Minister for Education in Hälsans förskola, or I mean Tellusgruppen, or sorry, I mean the Minister for Education in the Swedish government has stated they are proud of.

Mr. Speaker! One year after I graduated from upper secondary school, the school called Västra skolan was closed down. It was a municipal school with a long history in the municipality, centrally located in a historical building – a popular school. Vänsterpartiet opposed this. Together with teachers and the trade union movement, we fought against it, but the school was closed down. The reason given was declining student numbers. But according to the same forecasts, we would need a new school two years later.

A couple of hours from there, in Solna municipality, right-wing politicians announced two years ago that municipal schools would be closed due to declining student numbers. They were closed.

Now it is time for the next school. Båtsmansskolan in Haninge municipality is to be closed. The right-wing alliance in Haninge has, from one day to the next, announced that the school cannot continue to be operated due to poor finances. This is the school in the municipality that has the highest proportion of qualified teachers.

What all these three municipalities have in common, together with a number of other municipalities over the last 25 years, is that they have had or have municipal executive boards that have made decisions on the closure of well-functioning municipal schools in order to clear the way for private school corporations - which are often owned by former politicians.

The case concerning my former secondary school had a happy ending. Vänsterpartiet took over the government of the municipality and the power over the school administration, and we ensured that the municipal school was reopened together with the red-green parties. How it will go in future cases for the schools in Solna or Haninge depends on which parties the voters vote for, not only in the last election but also in upcoming elections.

The Left Party's message is clear: We will not accept this type of school closures, which only have the purpose of lowering and destroying the municipal school. We will never accept the market school.

Mr. Speaker! There is a paragraph about school libraries in the committee report, where we in Vänsterpartiet believe that we should look more closely at how school libraries can be strengthened. The investigation on strengthened school libraries and teaching materials proposed in its sub-report School Libraries for Education and Training that it should appear in the Education Act that school libraries shall be staffed, primarily with staff who have a degree in library and information science.

One of the reasons why students today do not have access to school libraries is that these are not staffed. Students are met by a locked door or, in the case of the schools that the group here in front of me in the chamber advocates for, by non-existent school libraries. The reasons vary across the country and over time. It is about a mixture of austerity demands, profit interest, and ignorance, unfortunately both among principals and among elected officials, regarding the benefits of staffed school libraries. But now it is primarily about the fact that the schools will not even receive enough in the budget from this government to be able to have school libraries.

Another point that is very important for Vänsterpartiet concerns mother tongue education and the right to a developed education in national minority languages.

According to the Tidö Agreement, an investigation shall be appointed to review mother tongue instruction in schools. We have all heard what this could mean. Patrick Reslow, member of the Education Committee for Sverigedemokraterna, has stated in the media that the party's hope is that mother tongue instruction should disappear. According to Fredrik Malm, mother tongue instruction should be reviewed and developed. It is very unclear for Sweden's population what this point in the Tidö Agreement will entail. But one thing we know, and that is that it is about pointing out a specific group in society and children who have a foreign background.

In the Sweden Democrats' reservation, it is written: Previous studies showed that a strong mother tongue is important for children's development of their second language, but later research has shown that it makes no difference either way.

This is very amusing, because the Sweden Democrats have been against mother tongue instruction since the day they were founded in neo-Nazism. If it were the case that there was previously research in favor of mother tongue instruction showing that it led to something positive, one might wonder why the Sweden Democrats were against it even then. This is the ultimate proof that fake news and resistance to facts are part of the Sweden Democrats', and now also the Tidö Agreement's, non-existent backbone.

Anne Reath Warren, lecturer in didactics at Uppsala University, has among other things said in Omni in response to this that students who study their mother tongue for a longer period get better results in other subjects and that the criticism of the teaching is based on a myth, which is not based on research. Several researchers who have commented on the issue are on exactly the same line.

In the Tidö Agreement, it states that the proposal does not concern the national minority languages, but we all know how fascism works: They start with certain groups, and then it continues. To those of you who belong to national minorities, I therefore have one thing to say: Let us fight these nationalist proposals before they have passed!

Learning is strongly associated with the mother tongue. Consolidating knowledge in one's own language is also a way to learn the Swedish language. But this is not the only positive reason, it is also about strengthening one's identity in order to be able to take a role in the society one finds oneself in. Beyond this, the subject has the mission to support the students in their knowledge development, and there we know what the research says.

It is of the utmost importance for us to continue strengthening mother tongue instruction. But it must be said that mother tongue instruction unfortunately is not given the same status as other school subjects in the school's timetable with guaranteed instruction time, despite the subject having knowledge requirements and grading criteria. We therefore believe that the government, instead of phasing out mother tongue instruction, should take the initiative for a minimum guaranteed instruction time in the subject.

Mr. Speaker! In the Swedish school curriculum, the entire document begins with the main heading The school's values and mission. Several have mentioned a part of these values from the rostrum here earlier today. The subheadings deal, among other things, with basic values regarding human rights as well as understanding and compassion. It states that the Convention on the Rights of the Child shall be followed, and it states that solidarity with one's fellow human beings shall be shown.

It is what we have agreed upon in this Riksdag and what governments—even the previous center-right ones—have decided shall apply for the children and what they shall learn in the Swedish school.

Everyone who in some way wants to safeguard parts of the Swedish curriculum in these respects, while simultaneously wanting to safeguard the students' interests over market interests, should know that we, together with other parties, will fight to be their voice. We will, together with union representatives and with all those who know what this right-wing policy entails, ensure that we fight against the right and resist these dreadful proposals as best we can.

(Applause)

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Mr. Speaker! I want to begin by moving for the approval of reservation 8. Naturally, I stand behind all our reservations.

The situation we have right now across all of Sweden is that the school is bleeding money. That is the reality. Teachers are being laid off all over Sweden.

What is the government investing in the spring budget? What money will now be spent on Sweden's schools and teachers? Absolutely nothing! There is not a single investment that goes directly to the school in the spring budget that has just been presented, while teachers are being laid off across the country. This is the reality, Mr. Speaker!

One can talk as much as one wants here in the speaker's chair about things one wants to do with the school, but if one does not contribute to ensuring there is money, it does not make that much of a difference. Yes, the municipalities have the primary responsibility for the school - undoubtedly. The municipalities have, first and foremost, the responsibility to ensure there is money in it - undoubtedly. But the state also has a part of the responsibility. It is we who, to a very large extent, decide what the schools shall do, what requirements they must live up to, and what costs they must have, and we are very bad at financing the requirements we set. Then one cannot just - as some parties, especially parties in government positions with education ministers and school ministers, are happy to do - complain about the municipalities. It is not reasonable.

Today, Mr. Speaker, we are talking about what is fundamental in education. Teachers are fundamental, and Sveriges Lärare calls this a catastrophe budget for Swedish schools. That is the reality. Then one can once again stand here in the speaker's chair as a representative for the government parties or their support party SD and talk about all sorts of things, but if one does nothing oneself, from here, to ensure that these things can be done, it helps nothing.

It is the reality. The municipalities are bleeding, teachers are being laid off, and the government is doing nothing.

Something that is also fundamental in education, besides teachers, is resources. At the same time as this government refuses to take action to send money in the budget, it also refuses to take action to review the distribution of school funding and the resource distribution model for Swedish schools. We have asked time and again: Can we not sit down and create a long-term model? Can we not ensure that something happens? Never does the government say: Yes, let us do something about this.

No, we continue to put money where it makes no difference. We know that the schools that take the greatest responsibility are not those that receive the most money, but the government refuses to do anything about it. Those who ensure that there are qualified teachers, those who ensure that there are schools across the whole country – and schools are needed across the whole country if the whole country is to live – are disadvantaged by the current model, and the government does not want to do anything. That is the reality.

Mr. Speaker! Another thing that is completely fundamental is that Swedish school is fantastic. I am very tired of hearing people here in the speaker's chair repeatedly blacken Swedish school. It has also happened tonight in this chamber. People pretend that Swedish school is terrible.

The Swedish school results have increased over the last ten years, approximately. That is also the reality. Yes, there were problems with the latest PISA measurement. When it comes to the results concerning the newly arrived, there are issues. But when it comes to those who are born in Sweden and their results, there is no doubt that the results are increasing, while at the same time we have received an enormous number of children who have come to Sweden without a word of Swedish. We have succeeded with this, and when I say "we," it is not I but we as a society. It is the teachers out there, the principals and all other staff in the school who have succeeded with it. So thank you very much! You are not rubbish, as people from the government and its supporting party claim. You are fantastic! That is the reality. It is being done out there in Swedish schools, but you do not always get the support you should get from here.

The Sverigedemokraterna representative stood here at the rostrum and said that Swedish school is becoming worse and worse. I would be ashamed to say such things. How are we to make Swedish school better if our foremost representatives in this chamber say such things? Does it make it easier to recruit teachers, do we think? No, it probably does not. Swedish school is becoming better and better right now, even under the latest government. It was not everything that turned out right, really not. There is much that we would have done differently. But it is still the reality that exists, and we must say that.

Another thing that is fundamental is that Swedish school must live up to the Swedish constitution. According to the Swedish constitution, you cannot differentiate between different religions in law. You cannot say that Muslim independent schools are not allowed to exist but that Christian ones are. It is freedom of religion, and everyone must be treated equally.

I know that the Christian Democrats in their hearts think this is important. Still, they have to live with these types of things. I understand that it is difficult, but the reality is that one must live up to the constitution. The Sweden Democrats must also. I understand that it is difficult for you, but you actually have to live up to the Swedish constitution.

The Swedish constitution makes it impossible to say that Muslim schools should be closed and that Christian ones should not. It is illegal. It was attempted here with that no new religious independent schools—or confessional schools, as they are called—should be allowed to start. It is very clear: It is against the constitution, because it means that some may and others may not. This has already been established. You are presenting unconstitutional proposals here in the chamber. Why? Read up!

One also stands here and says that there are problems with the Muslim schools. Several Muslim schools were closed during the previous government. That is a fact. It is nothing that is starting now. They have been closed during recent years. We have been involved in strengthening the rules. I can certainly see to strengthening some of these rules, but schools were closed during 2019, 2020, 2021, and 2022 before the new government got started. That is a fact. Read up!

There have been articles about psychological abuse in Christian schools for decades. Girls and boys have been forbidden from being together. Scientific education has been forbidden. That is the reality. Read up! Let us do something about the schools that do not work, regardless of why and regardless of who owns them!

We are on board with reviewing the rules, but we do not agree to submit constitutionally non-compliant proposals that are only about signals regarding things other than good schooling - really not!

Mr. Speaker! Another thing that is important is teaching materials. It was good that money came in this autumn for more books in schools. But it is also important that it is the profession and not the politicians who decide which teaching materials should be used in the classroom. It is the teacher in the classroom and not the Liberals in the Riksdag who decide which is the right teaching material in the specific situation. That is how it actually is.

I do not want to stand here in the speaker's chair, at this rostrum in front of my dear colleagues, and decide what the teacher out in the classroom shall teach from their rostrum. I do not want to, because I do not have the prerequisites, the knowledge or anything, not even the education, for this. I know that the representatives of the Liberals do not have it either.

We shall not interfere with what happens inside the classroom. We shall not decide how one should conduct their teaching. On the other hand, we would like to start a textbook committee that can give recommendations on what is good and can show that other textbooks are not particularly good. That is very good. Let us do that instead! Unfortunately, we have not received support from the government for it, but I would very much like to do so.

Mr. Speaker! Another thing that is very important is that there is safety. Safety is completely fundamental in school. My colleague Noria Manouchi from Malmö said many things that were very good, but it is probably not half of them who come to school who do so with clenched fists. It was probably an error on her part. But there is too much violence in school.

We want to strengthen knowledge about violence in schools. We want to develop plans to act against honor oppression. We must get young people to understand what unhealthy norms exist surrounding abuse in young relationships. They are very clearly documented, and we must do much more about them. We must invest much more in mental and sexual health in schools. It is absolutely crucial for our students to feel well.

Mr. Speaker! We force children into school. But we do not always ensure that they feel as well as they could. There is a great deal left to be done here.

I would like to thank most of my colleagues for a good debate. But please, can we in this chamber take our job seriously and do it better. We have a responsibility for how things turn out out there. Then we cannot present proposals that conflict with the constitution, facts, and science. We must do better than this.

(Applause)

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Mr. Speaker! I become a bit puzzled when Niels Paarup-Petersen in the speaker's chair seems to insinuate, directly or possibly indirectly, that I myself and my party argue that we want to decide which textbooks should be used in different classrooms. We have never said that. I have never argued for that.

However, I advocate the view that Niels Paarup-Petersen may not agree with: that it is better for children to have textbooks than for them to have no textbooks. Therefore, this government is making the largest investment ever so that we can have textbooks in school. It seems to concern Niels Paarup-Petersen, for some strange reason.

It is the opposite. I do not know if any special committee of people is needed to say which textbooks one should have. I think that the decision-making regarding which textbooks are purchased for the school should be decentralized. Above all, the individual teachers should be given much greater influence. They work with the textbooks and see which books they think work well in teaching. By increasing the appropriations, there is also a greater opportunity for teachers to have greater influence over this.

Mr. Speaker! Furthermore, I want to repeat something that is a bit strange. Of the resources for Swedish schools, 92 percent come from the municipalities. It would be a bit more appropriate if the parties that govern the largest municipalities – for example, the Social Democrats are involved in governing nine of Sweden's ten largest municipalities – were able to manage certain municipal priorities.

In tough times with high inflation, one must choose to prioritize the school. That is what the government has done with 9,000 places in vocational adult education, large investments in teaching materials, and billion-kronor investments in welfare for this year. But it is strange that Social Democratic municipalities are cutting the appropriations and blaming the government. And then Niels Paarup-Petersen comes here and says that the Social Democrats are always right. That really says something about the Center Party nowadays.

(Applause)

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Mr. Speaker! To the unread Fredrik Malm, I want to say that I really do not believe that the Social Democrats are always right. I can tell them now: You are wrong. So let it be recorded in the minutes.

The Social Democrats are actually wrong very often. Those who have worked with me in Malmö know that it has always been a starting point. I have, while we have sat in the chamber, retweeted that the Social Democrats are cutting money for schools in a way that is not reasonable and that the Center Party in Malmö invests more money than they do on schools. Now it has also been entered into the minutes, which exist for all time.

So here is the thing: I really want to invest more in teaching materials. We have also not removed the investment that you made. It is very good. But the Liberals say time and again that certain teaching materials should be used and others should not. I do not think it is up to me to evaluate which teaching materials are best. I believe it is up to the teacher. It is fundamental.

I say again that it is primarily up to the municipalities to decide. Approximately 92 percent of the resources come from the municipalities. So it is absolute. But we must also remember that at least 90 percent of the demands on the schools come from here. There is a discrepancy between the demands and the money. If we here in the Riksdag time and again raise the demands on the municipalities and do not send money along with them, we cannot complain that they have difficulty financing. It is not reasonable.

This chamber has a responsibility to ensure that the requirements we set for the municipalities to live up to are followed by financial investments. This is not being done in the current situation. That is one of the reasons. As it stands now, the municipalities are bleeding money.

As a government representative, one can of course sit here and think: They have to manage it themselves. One can also think: We can cooperate and get a society that functions.

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Mr. Speaker! If one looks at the expenditure areas in the state budget, one sees that the large additions of resources occur, among other things, in our areas, to Swedish school. Partly, the government and the four parties in the government base believe that education and school are important, partly it is about the fact that we are entering tougher times. This means that support will be required, not least for transition. Therefore, we are making very large investments in, for example, municipal vocational adult education and also the university college with many new places.

From the Riksdag's side, we take a great responsibility with the budget bill and also the autumn budget. We invest. The problem is that many municipalities do not manage to prioritize the school but prioritize other municipal activities instead.

Mr. Speaker! Niels Paarup-Petersen is right that the Social Democrats are often wrong. But at the same time, he is wrong when, in his argumentation, he gives the Social Democrats the right in some issues. That is how we can summarize the whole thing.

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Mr. Speaker! Fredrik Malm is wrong in that I have given the Social Democrats the right. I did not speak about them at all in my speech, but that is another matter.

It is not just me; the teachers say that this is a catastrophe budget. It is the trade unions' response.

The government has cut back on vocational training, on YH, and on komvux. You have put in a little money now. But you took away much more earlier. To take away a lot and add a little is not an investment. That is not how the world works. You cannot go home to your children and say: Hi! Now we are going to have Saturday sweets, take everything away and then give two pieces of candy and expect them to be happy. I do not think that works that way. It will not give them more candy. It will give them less candy. It is basic math and physics. I believe that Fredrik Malm understands that nonetheless.

We must be honest about the situation we are in right now. The government is not sending any extra money to schools at all in the latest budget. There are absolutely few things one can apply for, but no direct money will come to the municipalities' schools. It does not.

At the same time, they are cutting vocational training, YH and komvux, and they are closing the trade schools etcetera. It is not investing in Swedish education. Yes, extra funds will come to YH and to komvux in this budget. But a few months ago, they precisely removed even more money.

If we want an education system that develops and where teachers can stay and not be dismissed, as they are being right now, we must contribute by investing in Swedish schools. I honestly would have thought that the Liberals – given everything they have to swallow in this government, which is as far from liberal as it can be – would at least manage to push through some school investments. But not even that do you get. No money is going to Sweden's teachers and schools in this spring budget. It is remarkable.

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

Camilla Hansén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Today we address education issues from a broad perspective - fundamental matters regarding education. Even the Green Party members have real breadth in their motions. It is about the democratic mandate, about gender pedagogy, about media and information literacy, about increased knowledge of nature, outdoor life and the right of public access, about mother tongues and about minority languages.

But the school is much more than that. It is an activity with hundreds of thousands of children, students, and teachers and many more professional groups. They go to school every day. It is there that a hope for the future is laid down. I really want to highlight all those people who do this job every day, who work hard, who see the children in the classroom and who make it so that the students leave school and that the children leave preschool and feel that they were in the right place that day.

This is an activity that shall be grounded in science and proven experience. It shall be a safe place for students and employees. The students shall grow up to be citizens of society who shall continue to develop our country and the world. They shall lead the country when we hand over the baton. That is what we shall prepare them for. They shall be all the people around the country who make our society function. It is broad. It is fundamental.

For both my party and for the others, it becomes a bit trivialized when we present our core issues. I want to mark in this way that exactly that which is fundamental regarding education issues is much broader, deeper, and larger than what we focus on when we divide it into small parts.

We have touched upon a number of important areas that are raised in the report. It concerns classroom teaching, from this classroom or other, denominational schools, reading, bullying and staffed school libraries. We all have these heart issues. There are also very high expectations with every heart issue from every party, from every politician. Sometimes it is as if we seem to be more interested in our own detailed heart issues than in actually shelling out the money required to fulfill our extremely high expectations of what the school should achieve as a social institution.

We politicians are more likely to come with finger-wagging and details than with resources and trust in the school's professions. I am a bit careless sometimes. I talk about teachers, but it is not just teachers in a school. There are so many professions, and they are all equally important.

But what is truly fundamental when it comes to education? Knowledge. I have been new to the committee since last autumn. When I am out meeting people and talking about school and education, it often boils down to one thing: skilled teachers who have time for their students.

It is quite fundamental. It is about allocating resources so that skilled teachers have time with their students and that they have time to be skilled and become even more skilled.

Miljöpartiet is the only party that was prepared to give the municipalities the money they demanded in the autumn when it came to the state budget for the current year. It would give the municipalities better opportunities to actually take the responsibility they have. One cannot streamline human relations down to nothing.

I will now touch upon some of the detailed core issues that both I and my party will be bringing to this debate.

Something that several of you might recognize and that I know is close to the hearts of many of us is the school's democracy mission. I am sure that many of you were out in schools during the election campaign. I was too. It is a rather tough job. It is quite rushed. One doesn't really have time to talk about what it means to be an elected official or to have any ideologically deep-seated discussions. I would have liked to have done that. I asked the teachers if I could come back at other times. No, then all parties must come at the same time. No, that's not possible, because then it's just so-so.

I am concerned that schoolchildren meet politicians more and more rarely. I do not think it is good that one only meets politicians in the final stages of an election campaign. I believe, in fact, that some of us politicians are not our best selves when we speak in slogans and in 30-second spots.

I have met students in upper secondary school who do not know that there are local elected representatives. I believe it is very important that more students meet politicians from different parties in their everyday lives. This is what more people think. The committee Democracy 100 Years has proposals on how the school's democratic mission can be strengthened, and it means that Skolverket shall be tasked with making it easier with politician visits in schools. Skolverket shall also evaluate what it means that political representatives are invited to school more and more rarely.

There are several issues in this report that are close to my heart. It is about knowledge of nature and the environment. It is about species knowledge and about the right of public access. It is about equality and about the need for every child to be met for the child they are.

Mr. Speaker! I want to conclude by reminding what is fundamental about education: skilled teachers and school staff who have time for the students.

I would like to move for approval of reservation 3, regarding the school's democracy mandate, and reservation 7, which concerns all children's right to develop their full potential regardless of gender and gender identity.

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I apologize already for extending the debate. I just have to comment a little bit.

There was talk about the sorting school and that these emergency schools would be some kind of very serious sorting. To some extent, it is some form of sorting, and it is a sorting because it is needed. No one wants this. No one thinks it is good. But it is needed.

There are already emergency schools in some municipalities in Sweden today, but they are called something else. They also exist in Social Democratic-led municipalities. Are they closed, if it is now a serious sorting? No, they are not closed. They will not be closed either, because they are needed.

I grew up in a very social democratic society. It was good in many ways and less good in some ways. When I went to school, there was something called "obsklasser," social democratic "obsklasser." Did anyone think they were great? No, but they were needed. That is why they existed.

I am missing something in the debate. I have myself worked within the school system for many years. Here, we never talk about all those students who are disturbed by rowdy children – children who perhaps are overactive, who have some diagnosis, or who are generally restless and rowdy. It can be children who seriously disturb entire classes during half and whole lessons. We never talk about those students. Those students have large parts of their education spoiled. It is not possible to learn things and to take in knowledge if one is constantly being disturbed, especially not if one also feels insecure and threatened in the classroom. There is research on this, if one would like to talk about research.

The Tidö parties are slaughtering the school's budget, I heard here. The school is municipal. It was municipalized by Göran Persson, Social Democrat. I was against it, but he municipalized the school and pushed it through. Thus, the funding is municipal. The municipalities shall finance the school. If I remember correctly, the school received 12 billion extra before this budget year. How can it be to slaughter the school?

It is social democratically governed municipalities that do not prioritize the school sufficiently. In Botkyrka, where I am active, we have always had a higher budget than what the social democratic majority has had.

It was also mentioned that we Sverigedemokrater point out a specific group when it comes to mother tongue instruction. Students with a Swedish background do not need and shall not have any mother tongue instruction. That is just how it is - I cannot do much about it. In our party, we have many people with a foreign background who have had mother tongue instruction, and they think the same way.

I move on to the study that was published in a daily newspaper and which showed that students with mother tongue instruction had higher grades. It is true that a study was conducted where it was shown that they had higher grades. This, however, actually showed nothing because there were not enough parameters. It was assumed - even by researchers - that these students very well could be more ambitious than average and more ambitious than the group they were compared with. Therefore, the study was not accurate.

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Mr. Speaker! Member Robert Stenkvist thought it was absolutely necessary to take the floor to remind all of Sweden's teachers and municipalities that no money will come to the schools as long as SD has anything to say about it.

(Applause)

It was the promise. It was this that it was necessary to remind about from the rostrum: "We guarantee that not a single krona from the state will go to Sweden's schools and municipalities, for they shall manage on their own."

Please be so kind, Sweden's teachers! You are being dismissed now, because there is no money!

The state is constantly increasing the demands on schools. This increases the demands on money, which in turn makes it harder for the municipalities to finance the school in an economic crisis. At the same time as the borrowing in the Swedish treasury is extremely low, the municipalities' borrowing is hitting the ceiling almost everywhere. But of course, the state is not supposed to help, because we are not a society - we do not hang together!

The state is its own little thing. We can play up here and have plenty of money in our pockets while the municipalities bleed. It is not our problem, according to the member from Sverigedemokraterna.

This is as far from reality as it can possibly be. If one looks at how it actually looks, one can say that money has arrived. In 2022, the general state grants were 152 billion kronor. Did the member from Sverigedemokraterna know how large the general state grants were in 2023? They were 152 billion kronor – the amount was therefore the same. According to the member from Sverigedemokraterna, it is an enormous investment, but that is simply not the case.

It is very difficult, even for the state, to ensure that there is enough money in society. I do not think that any of our parties will be able to provide that much at all. It might eventually be Vänsterpartiet, because they have no limitations whatsoever – it is just a matter of throwing away the state's, the municipalities', and the regions' money at any time.

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I actually reminded that the school is municipal. I did not remind of anything else. I reminded that it was Göran Persson who municipalized it.

The municipalities need more money. They have received more money. I promise nothing for the future. An autumn budget will arrive soon, and I have no knowledge yet of what will be in it. There may very well be supplements.

The chairman is putting words in my mouth that I have never said. This is primarily a municipal issue, and the state helps as well as it can. However, the state probably cannot, in the situation that currently exists, with war and with the pandemic we have had, patch up all wounds – I do not think that is possible. I do not even think it would have been possible if the other side had won the election. It is so much easier to come up with the correct appropriations in opposition.

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

Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)

Mr. Speaker! If the Sweden Democrats begin to gain at least a small insight into what it means to take responsibility, I think it has been worth having this debate. This is, in fact, not something we have seen before. It has been populism upon populism, regardless of whether it has concerned 10 kronor lower prices at the pump or whatever it may have been. It has been completely unrealistic proposals that have never been financed by anyone and that could never have become a reality. Such things we have heard time and again from the Sweden Democrats. If they have started to take responsibility, that is very good.

The government added 6 billion extra in general grants to the municipalities. This corresponded exactly to the money that ran out in 2022. It was therefore not more money, but it corresponded to the money in the previous investments. It was not an extra krona to the municipalities; that is the reality. It can also be read about this.

When the member feels a need to take the floor just to remind that it is a municipal responsibility to finance this, it is very difficult for me to make it mean that one should send more money to the municipalities. That was indeed the background to why the member stood up. I claimed that perhaps it was time to send a little more money to the school from the state's side. The member stood up to point out that this is not the state's but the municipalities' job, which I interpreted as that the member probably does not want to send more money. I think it is a fairly reasonable interpretation.

If the promise from the Sverigedemokraterna was that more money should be sent to the schools, one could have imagined that this would have been done in the budget that the Sverigedemokraterna have just been involved in presenting. Otherwise, they might have time to change it – I don't know how this works. Perhaps it could be possible to make a small supplementary budget. The Centerpartiet has not presented its. The Sverigedemokraterna can certainly make a supplementary budget and put in more money for the municipalities. Maybe we can reach an agreement? Then we can remove this. Then more money will go to the schools, and then we can avoid so many teachers being laid off.

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Mr. Speaker! The Sweden Democrats are not presenting any budget of their own; for the time being, the Sweden Democrats are making budgets together with the other Tidö parties. I have no idea what will be in the autumn budget, and I do not think that anyone else here has any idea either yet. We have just presented a VÅP.

C usually is not the party that talks about increased subsidies. You in C usually instead talk about lower taxes. A change has occurred now that you have jumped over to the other side; that is what is said. I am, however, quite old - 64 years old - and remember very well how it sounded earlier. I was horrified by your neoliberalism then. But parties can change, and it is well that one can change.

Fundamentals of education

That it would be populism not to promise enormous state subsidies, however, I think is taking it a bit too far. This government - and this government base - will naturally help the municipalities as much as possible moving forward without risking an inflation fire. We do not want to see municipalities go under.

I would, however, like to remind the members that municipalities have their own responsibility, Mr. Speaker, and one must prioritize correctly in the municipalities. As I mentioned from the rostrum, we in my home municipality have always had a higher school budget than the majority have had, because we prioritize differently. We have prioritized the school over a lot of peripheral matters. We want people to devote themselves to the core activities, and the school is an important core activity.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 26 April.)

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