The University

Fredrik Malm (L)

Madam Speaker! We now have to debate higher education policy. It is an issue that is completely decisive for Sweden's future as a knowledge nation, as an innovation engine, and as a liberal and democratic society. I want to begin by moving for the approval of the proposal in the report.

Free and independent universities are a cornerstone of an open society. Academic freedom is not just a principle but a prerequisite for critical thinking, scientific breakthroughs, and resilience against disinformation, authoritarian trends, and much more. What we are now seeing in the USA, Madam Speaker, shows how quickly this freedom can be dismantled. President Donald Trump has threatened and financially punished universities, banned international students, and pressured academic institutions into political submission. It is a brutal development. That is why the Liberals stand firm that academic freedom requires distance from political power, not loyalty to it.

The government has appointed a special inquiry into academic freedom, and we have already strengthened the legal protection for researchers. The right to think freely, speak freely, and research freely is a liberal fundamental principle.

We face societal challenges that require knowledge. They concern climate change, antibiotic resistance, organized crime, a labor market under transformation, and much more. The college is a central resource to meet this. Therefore, the government's policy is clear. We put quality, relevance to working life, and academic integrity at the center.

A particularly important issue in this year's report is also artificial intelligence. AI is fundamentally changing both the education system and the labor market. Therefore, the Swedish Council for Higher Education has been tasked with monitoring and supporting the universities' work with AI, including how education programs are adapted to the new competence needs.

Madam Speaker! Resource allocation is another key issue. According to Eurostudent, Sweden has significantly fewer teacher-led hours than other European countries. To reverse that development, the government has increased the compensation amounts for both 2024 and 2025, first for natural science and then for social science education. In the longer term, the resource allocation system shall be reviewed with a focus on quality. We in the Liberals want to see more teacher-led teaching – not just as a volume issue, Madam Speaker, but to ensure real knowledge acquisition. Self-study is very good, but education should be built on a living dialogue between teacher and student.

Madam Speaker! Security at Swedish educational institutions needs to be strengthened. The Total Defence Research Institute has shown that universities are targets for foreign powers. The Government demands that all educational institutions report on their security work, not least regarding information and cyber security. We have also decided that the boards shall have security competence within them. International collaborations must take place responsibly. The Government has therefore adopted national guidelines that set high requirements for integrity, security, and academic freedom regardless of the partner country's political system.

Madam Speaker! We will also secure lifelong learning throughout the country. Development work is underway regarding distance education, independent courses, and retraining. The Government has received the investigation on a new compensation model. It is now being prepared in order for the higher education institutions to better be able to meet the needs of the working life.

The pandemic meant a veritable wave of distance learning. Digital teaching proved to be a good and completely necessary tool in that situation. The quality must, however, be raised in the future as well. It is important to point out that we Liberals are clear that education on campus and a living exchange between lecturers and students must be the core of higher education activities in Sweden.

Madam Speaker! Freedom of speech covers everyone. But it must also ensure the safety of fellow students and teachers. Academic freedom does not mean that some are allowed to silence others. We have seen examples where demonstrations surrounding the Israel–Palestine conflict have disrupted teaching and research. The vandalism of researcher Anders Persson's office at Linné University, for example, is an assault that can never be accepted. Expressions of opinion must never become threats.

Researchers who participate in public debate are increasingly subjected to hate, threats, and harassment. To ensure the protection of the academy, the government has therefore appointed a special inquiry to propose measures to protect researchers against undue influence. The assignment was given in April this year and is an important part of defending academic freedom in practice and not just in theory.

Madam Speaker! The Liberals are Sweden's school and knowledge party. We have presented the largest research and innovation bill in Swedish history – a long-term investment in science, technological excellence, and socially beneficial research. We are taking the school back to the basics – reading, writing, and arithmetic. Knowledge is the path into the future for the individual, society, and the country.

We are a small country, but we have great ambitions. To achieve them, we must continue to invest in high-quality research and education. The government does this, with the Liberals as a guarantor.

(Applause)

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Fredrik Malm, for your speech! I listened carefully and for a long time to see if anything would come up regarding one of the most important groups at an educational institution, namely the students.

The debate concerns the motions that have been submitted. There is an opportunity to influence things that happen in the future through them. One thing that will happen this autumn is that the government parties will produce a budget bill.

When it comes to students and student influence, the Liberals can be part of and play a decisive role in stopping the cuts of almost 30 percent on student unions and student influence that threaten universities and higher education institutions in Sweden. Student unions in, among others, Sundsvall, Östersund, Kristianstad, Skövde and Karlstad have raised this. Sveriges förenade studentkårer have spoken about how it can affect their work to ensure good quality and influence for the students at the higher education institutions. They have an important task to ensure that the teaching is reliable, safe and high-quality.

It may sound as if it is only student unions that think this, but the Swedish Association of Universities and Colleges, SUHF, also stands behind the Swedish United Student Unions' demand that student influence be secured throughout our country. My question is how the Liberals and the chairman of the Education Committee, Fredrik Malm, will act to stop the cut of almost 30 percent on student influence.

(Applause)

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Madam Speaker! Student influence is very important. But when it comes to the autumn budget bill, the tables for it have probably not been finalized. That one sometimes makes downward adjustments for temporary funds due to things that occur is not the same as cutting back. We all know that reinforcements were made during a period when more needed to be done, but that these were then scaled down. I therefore find it very difficult to understand the rhetoric that the Social Democrats are engaging in here.

One thing is certain, however: One can influence through how one votes. It would be very good if Niklas Sigvardsson and the Social Democrats took the opportunity they have to vote for strengthened academic freedom and strengthened student influence when we vote on the budget bill for the coming year this autumn. Then they can press the green button.

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! If I were to press the green button during the vote on the budget bill this autumn, it would mean 30 percent less money for the country's student unions. That is probably one of the last things I would do in the autumn budget work.

The Chairman of the committee, Fredrik Malm, speaks about temporary money. But the problem is that when one carries out this, one clearly points out that 5 million kronor of that increase of 30 million kronor that one made during the pandemic was directed towards the corona pandemic. 5 million kronor is what one could expect an increased responsibility during a pandemic to cost.

Nothing was said about the remaining 25 million, even though they had been eroded since the time when the Liberals were in government and abolished the mandatory membership. Then it was said that in order to ensure the student unions' influence, money needed to be given to them. Then this was not accounted for. It was, however, done when the Social Democrats were in government, and thus the student influence at the country's educational institutions was secured.

During the pandemic, they received pandemic funds but also a long-term supplement intended to strengthen student influence.

Student influence is a guarantee that students can speak out if things happen at educational institutions that should not happen. It can be things between students but also between teachers and students. It is about securing the quality of education. If students are allowed to participate and influence their education, they feel a greater sense of ownership. If we have a very clear and flat structure, which we have in our country, it also contributes to strengthened academic success. In the labor market and within school and academia, we safeguard clear dialogues between students, teachers, universities, and the managements of educational institutions.

Will the Liberals work to ensure that the student influence funds remain, or will the threat of cuts, as the budget documents currently show, become a reality?

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Madam Speaker! The Social Democrats always have a knack in their rhetoric for making everything seem like a cut. If one has made temporary reinforcements – and it has been clear that they were temporary – and then scales them down, the Social Democrats say that it is a cut. That is not quite how it works.

Madam Speaker! I do, however, fully agree with Niklas Sigvardsson's description of the importance of active student union activity, of the fact that student influence is important and of what positive advantages it brings. But I think that, in that context, one should still broaden the discussion slightly, Madam Speaker. It is not solely the organized student union activity that strengthens student influence.

In my main speech, I mentioned, for example, the Eurostudents review. In that, one can see that a student who begins a university education in Sweden during the first term receives an average of 11 hours of teacher-led time per week, including supervision. The average in the EU is 18 hours. This too is a threat to student influence.

It is extremely important with quality-enhancing efforts. In the latest innovation and research proposition, we are now investing enormous sums to strengthen the quality within higher education. This is also important for student influence.

Furthermore, the rights legislation that Sweden has to a large extent is important, with the anti-discrimination legislation and the rights one has if one, for example, has a disability, so that one receives the support one needs and that student health functions.

Madam Speaker! Student influence is broader than Niklas Sigvardsson describes it as.

(Applause)

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! I would first like to move for approval of reservation 9.

Today we are debating the Education Committee's report 14 on higher education. Not too long ago, some of these issues were debated here in the chamber. This occurred during the large debate on the research and innovation bill. Nevertheless, this is a broad report that reflects how higher education continues to be one of our most important political tools for the individual's liberation but also for society's development and cohesion.

From a Social Democratic perspective, we want to be clear that higher education shall be for everyone, not for a few. It shall be based on knowledge, not purchasing power. It shall contribute to equality, not entrench inequality.

One of higher education's many important functions is to ensure that we have high-quality labor throughout our entire country. It is needed to strengthen growth. It is needed to strengthen our country's innovation capacity. It is needed so that our companies can have the opportunity to grow.

Higher education is also needed to ensure that society has the competence required for us to be able to take care of one another. We achieve this by ensuring that the entire country has access to well-educated teachers, nurses, social workers, police officers, and many other professional groups.

Higher education has an extremely great importance for local competence clusters where industries are established near the places where the workforce is located. In collaboration with the surrounding society, the education also becomes better and has higher quality.

Sweden has very good education, but there are challenges that require political action. We need to review how we distribute resources to higher education. In order to develop, our students must have access to skilled teachers and academics in their learning. We need to strengthen teacher-led time within higher education so that more people get the opportunity to develop and share knowledge together with competent teachers.

The educational provision for those already in the workforce needs to be strengthened across the entire country. Just as Member of Parliament Malm said, the government has a referral out regarding a resource distribution model to create opportunities for those already in the workforce to undergo further education and update their knowledge.

It is commendable and important, but there are risks with the investigation and the referral. Many of this government's previous proposals have often led to redistributions that have caused educational places in our country to be centralized rather than decentralized.

There is also a risk of displacement effects. New students will find it more difficult to access places in education. It may seem strange in a time of high unemployment when we need to get more people into work. We therefore need to review a new resource allocation model.

A new resource distribution model must ensure that we have education throughout the entire country, that students have access to high-quality teaching, and that people are given the opportunity to educate themselves at older ages. This applies both for the first time and for being able to supplement already existing knowledge. It strengthens individuals within their professions but also gives them the opportunity to change careers during their working lives. Therefore, investments in validation, decentralized education, and independent courses are needed. It strengthens the individual, growth, and us as a society.

Madam Speaker! Another matter in the report that is very important is students' conditions. It is not a marginal issue – it is a decisive future issue for the country's educational institutions. It is about how we shape a society that holds together, a society where every human being is given opportunities to grow, participate, and influence their situation.

For us Social Democrats, this is a fundamental issue of equality and democracy. In the Swedish social construction, democracy is not limited to election day. It permeates our institutions, our educations, and our workplaces. Student influence is therefore not an addition; it is a foundation. When students are given real influence over their education, both the quality of the education and the students' sense of participation are promoted. We know that active student unions and strong student voices are a resource, not a hindrance, for academic development.

Therefore, it is a political responsibility to ensure long-term funding for student unions and transparency in the universities' decision-making processes, and that students' voices are taken seriously throughout the institution's planning all the way up to the management level.

Here we unfortunately see other priorities from the Sweden Democrats and the government, as for 2026 a significant cut in the grant for student unions and student influence awaits. That is not how you build strong individuals who can stand up for their rights and their education.

But it is not only about the student unions' opportunity. It is also about that other associations of and for students must be given the opportunity to engage. Universities and colleges have in country after country and in time after time been an important catalyst for social debate and social engagement. So it must be as well in the future. Therefore, more uniform interpretations and better opportunities for associations to be active at the country's entire higher education institutions were needed, and student federations linked to political parties shall be a natural part of the higher education institutions' activities.

It is not only influence that is important for students, but also how they feel before, during, and after their studies. Mental ill-health among students unfortunately follows society at large and is increasing. Therefore, it is important that the Socialdemokraternas previous initiatives are both maintained and strengthened. But we cannot rest on our laurels and must continue to develop student health.

It is not enough to only look at how the students are doing. We must also ensure that they can accommodate their education through accessible learning environments and teaching materials at the country's higher education institutions. Students who feel well learn better, and students who have access to the right material and the right conditions do not only perform well but also feel better.

Madam Speaker! In conclusion: Sweden shall have a world-class higher education with engaged students. But it shall be a higher education for the whole people. We Social Democrats stand for a higher education policy where accessibility takes precedence over privileges, where social utility takes precedence over market thinking, and where knowledge is always a means to increase equality. We stand up for a higher education system where it is not the wallet that determines whether you get to study, but your will, your ability, and your curiosity.

(Applause)

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Madam Speaker! I vote in favor of the committee's proposal.

The sun is shining outside, and everywhere one sees a lot of happy students in graduation caps. It gives hope for the future. I am still proud of my graduation cap, even though it is no longer crystal white. I use it often, especially on Walpurgis Night at home in Gothenburg.

"What are you going to do now?" is probably the most common question students receive, and perhaps the answer is to work, travel, continue studying, or perform military service. A survey by CSN and UHR shows that 38 percent continue studying directly after upper secondary school, 50 percent start working, and 8 percent do not really know what they are going to do. Another survey shows that almost 50 percent of those between 25 and 64 have a post-secondary education. Higher education is therefore popular. But we would like to see even more people continue their studies. We Moderates and the other Tidö parties want to see many paths to work, also through higher studies.

But why do people continue to study? Surveys point to several points: better job opportunities, usually higher salary, personal development – one learns to think critically and takes in a lot of information – stronger social engagement – some even become politicians and end up in the Riksdag – better health and the possibility of jobs abroad. I have personally studied to be both a nurse and a doctor, and there were many fun years of study that gave me great friends for life.

Madam Speaker! What are the most important tasks for the educational institutions?

In the Higher Education Act, it is stated that the state as the principal shall organize higher education institutions, partly for education based on a scientific or artistic basis as well as proven experience, and partly for research, artistic research, and development work. The resources shall be used efficiently so that the quality of the education and research is high. This is the most fundamental.

Educational institutions shall also cooperate with the surrounding society, such as municipalities and the business sector, for mutual exchange. That which emerges within higher education and research shall also benefit society.

Furthermore, there shall be a close connection between research and education, and scientific credibility and good research ethics shall be safeguarded.

Schools should also actively promote and broaden recruitment to higher education, preferably from homes unfamiliar with studies. Lifelong learning is also important, and one might acquire more education as professional life changes.

Of course, academic freedom shall also be promoted and protected.

Madam Speaker! Just a month ago, we debated the research and innovation bill. As Fredrik Malm said earlier, we are very proud of it, because it is one of the largest investments in research ever. Sweden is a small but smart country, and we shall show internationally how skilled we are in research.

Academic freedom for teachers and researchers is extremely important. An investigator has now been appointed to examine whether the current regulatory framework is appropriate for protecting the academic freedom of researchers and teachers at all Swedish higher education institutions. If that is not the case, measures must be taken to strengthen this freedom. The assignment is to be reported by June 30, 2026, at the latest.

Madam Speaker! The Moderates argue that it is also important how colleges and universities are governed. A relevant question is whether the form of authority promotes higher education and research in the best way.

Increased cooperation between universities and society is needed. Reality is changing, which places higher demands on our educational institutions. Digitalization is important, as is stronger strategic governance.

We need to review what is best for the governance of the higher education institutions. It is important to conduct an open and unbiased investigation of how the future governance of our higher education institutions should look and how we provide the best conditions for academic freedom. In some countries in Europe, academic freedom is great, while in others it is less so.

Madam Speaker! I make many different site visits around Sweden to see how things are functioning and what the needs are. The constant question is about the skills shortage. A lot is happening within technological development, but there must also be people who have the right education to handle these jobs. Despite high unemployment, three out of four companies say that they have difficulty finding staff with the right knowledge.

To remedy the skills shortage, we must invest as early as in primary and secondary school. The quality must be high so that one can subsequently continue their studies. Almost 50 percent drop out of technical education due to deficiencies in mathematics. Just as many drop out of teacher training because they do not have sufficiently good knowledge of Swedish. Secondary school is therefore incredibly important in order to be able to proceed to higher education. We are therefore investing in both secondary school and higher education.

Madam Speaker! How do we attract more young people to continue their studies? How do we get more older people to study? How do we reach those unaccustomed to studying? It is necessary to invest in easily accessible information about what is available and where. One must also be able to compare the quality of education between different educational institutions. Furthermore, study guidance should be developed so that one can get tips on what one can study and what suits them. One should also be able to follow the establishment of graduates in the labor market, simply to have good role models. One must also invest in education within shortage occupations.

There are, for example, many companies that go out to both primary school and upper secondary school and talk about what educations are available and what one can work with later. Now, for example, we want to get many to study natural sciences, where we currently have a large shortage. In that case, it is good to have role models and for many to be able to come and talk. There can, of course, also be role models within the family.

I also always highlight – and do so again now – Marcus Wandt, our third astronaut. He studied to become a civil engineer at Chalmers in Gothenburg. One can, therefore, also become an astronaut if one studies at a university. It is important to have role models.

Madam Speaker! It is also important to learn to adapt to the development of society. We must have flexible educations. They must be able to be short, and they must be able to be long. They must be able to keep up with what is required in society right now.

Madam Speaker! We must also ensure that we make use of the AI development. It is extremely important that we provide education in AI. That requires a lot of competence. All universities must invest in it and keep up with the AI development.

We see, for example, that there is an enormous benefit of AI within medical research, including when it comes to how diseases are treated. It facilitates the research. Certain research that can be very demanding can be done in a much simpler way with the help of AI. It can also improve how diagnoses are made.

There is also much other technology that we must make use of.

I have one final point. Teacher education is extremely important. But many drop out of teacher education. Therefore, the Moderates and the Tidö parties are now ensuring that the entire teacher education is reviewed, so that we get a teacher education that works and so that, so to speak, the right students apply and want to continue with the education. It is an extremely important issue for us.

I vote in favor of the proposal in the report.

I also wish the Presidium a pleasant summer.

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! I intend to speak generally about our motions regarding higher education, but I will begin with a few words on the Riksrevisionen's report on third-country students who deviate from their studies after a short period. Therefore, my speech is slightly longer than the others. I apologize for that, but I want to get through this.

Both the Swedish National Audit Office and the Swedish Migration Agency have raised the problem with third-country students who, shortly after the start of their studies, drop out in order to disappear from the authorities' radar. Some of those who drop out end up on the black labor market. Others disappear into the mists of the shadow society. So, of course, we cannot have that.

According to the Swedish Migration Agency's report, some colleges profit from this illustrative activity. But I believe that society's needs take precedence over individual institutions' profit interests. I take it for granted that everyone agrees on that.

According to the Swedish National Audit Office's latest report, RiR 2024:21, the problem is relatively modest. It is, however, surprising that the Swedish National Audit Office in report RiR 2023:19 painted a significantly darker picture. The Swedish Migration Agency has also painted a significantly more serious scenario. An explanation for the different assessments would be appropriate. I don't believe we will ever get any such, but in any case.

For the sake of clarity, it is of course welcome if the problem is as small as possible. We do not want problems. But regardless of how small or large the problem is, some self-evident measures should be implemented:

Sufficient language skills in English shall be a requirement.

There should be more frequent controls of the students.

A limitation shall be introduced to only read the entire program.

There shall be an agreement between the Swedish Migration Agency and the educational institutions regarding reporting of crime.

The legislation should be changed regarding the limitation of the right to work during studies. It is strangely unlimited for foreign students today.

It is, in my opinion, extremely reasonable requirements, regardless of how large or small the above-described problem is. It is what we call common sense.

Madam Speaker! I move to other higher education and begin with a few words about the Swedish language within higher education. Much of the literature used within the higher education system is not available in Swedish. In that case, one simply must use literature in English. And if one has a good and competent lecturer who does not speak Swedish, the lecture must, of course, be held in English. The students are also assumed to be proficient in the English language.

But if none of those reasons are at hand, the Swedish language shall be used in teaching at Swedish educational institutions. Why then? We shall nurture and develop the Swedish language. It is our mother tongue, our official language. Here I know that the speakers agree with me with emphasis.

Perhaps even more importantly, studies have shown that understanding becomes deeper in difficult subjects if the mother tongue is used. It doesn't matter how good one is at English as a Swede; one never achieves the same depth of understanding in a foreign language, no matter how skilled one may be.

Madam Speaker! I usually always bring up equality and shall say something briefly on the subject. One cannot have quotas and at the same time have meritocratic principles, in the same way as one cannot have democracy while simultaneously having a civil service rule or military rule. One must have either one or the other. One must choose.

I will give the Left a point here. There may be legitimate reasons to want increased representation of a certain group. I read a long time ago about a college in the northern USA that had an underrepresentation of a group of indigenous people. At the same time, the institution wanted to uphold the meritocratic principle. They investigated why the group in question was underrepresented and concluded that the group had a poor basic schooling. It was not strange that they became underrepresented in higher education, was it? They therefore started a long-term, laborious work to improve the basic schooling.

It is a legitimate and proper way to address the problems, I think. It takes much longer than to quota in different groups. But it is the right way.

Madam Speaker! I move for approval of reservation 5 in the report on students who seriously abuse the free higher education we have in our country by threatening, exercising physical violence, or systematically harassing other students or teachers. These students shall be excluded for a shorter or longer period.

There are already provisions in the Higher Education Act regarding the suspension of students, Chapter 4, Sections 5–7 of the Higher Education Act. But the mentioned paragraphs need to be clarified or supplemented and, above all, used when it is justified.

Recently, we have received reports, which I want to assert possess high credibility, that pure mafia-rule has created fear and anxiety at certain educational institutions. University managements feel pressure to make certain decisions due to pure mob behavior. Many students can probably be regarded as young adults, but the real adult world is responsible for creating a safe and secure environment for everyone. We have freedom of expression and freedom of opinion in this country. This naturally also applies at our educational institutions.

I mean that it is at our educational institutions that students should learn to encounter opinions other than their own group's. Many find that difficult today. I believe it is a fundamental democratic upbringing that should also take place at our educational institutions. If we do not practice it at our universities, where then shall we practice it?

Madam Speaker! Another important issue is being noticed more and more, but I believe we have not talked about it before here in the chamber. In recent decades, a general academicization has occurred in our country and certainly in all of Western Europe. In connection with that development, the requirement for research affiliation has become increasingly stronger. In most cases, it is a welcome development. At the same time, the number of higher education institutions and places of study has steadily increased in our society.

Another trend that is not entirely positive is that vocational training is increasingly being placed under the jurisdiction of higher education.

These courses differ from purely theoretical courses by having important practical components, something that may appear foreign at our traditional universities. Furthermore, the research connection can in some cases become a bit artificial.

To get the best possible professionals, we should replace artificial research affiliation with more practical knowledge. We must also assess the professional education programs in a different way than is traditionally done within higher education. A police aspirant can be as skilled as possible on theoretical tests but completely useless in the profession itself. So we cannot have that, my friends. In some cases, we should completely remove professional education from higher education and reintroduce special educational institutions for certain professional educations. It is the result that counts, and not an ideological train of thought.

Lastly, Madam Speaker, something I touched upon just now.

In my previous speech here, regarding the research proposal, I raised our universities' responsibility and mission. I mentioned that our institutions of higher education shall not conduct their own foreign policy and that they shall not be governed by various activist groups.

On the same day, an official statement was published from our leading university – the one that should be our leading university – which clearly went far over the line. The statement was signed by the rector as well as the chairman of the university board.

Many stand here and speak nicely about research, science, and academic freedom. But those words mean nothing if, at the same time, one appoints individuals within the higher education system on obviously political grounds, individuals who in some extreme cases also have a tangible and documented difficulty in distinguishing facts from opinions. And how, for example, is a chairperson of a higher education board supposed to curb threatening activism if he or she essentially uses the same rhetoric?

If we really want to do something good for research and science, my friends, we must stop appointing people solely on political grounds. I believe this applies to both the right and the left.

With that, I wish everyone a pleasant summer because this is our last debate.

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Stenkvist, for the speech!

As usual, when the member stands in the rostrum, there are quite a few balls one could run at. But I intend to start with the part where the member speaks about basic democratic upbringing. Now I paraphrase the member: If we do not use it in our educational institutions, where in society should we use it?

It makes me think instinctively about student influence and how we use student influence as a democratic training component and an important part of the institutions' activities. Here, my reflection is how the Sweden Democrats view that question. The Sweden Democrats are, after all, involved in negotiating the budget that is to be passed here in the chamber this autumn.

As I said in my speech and in previous exchanges and stand by, it is an extremely important activity at our higher education institutions that we nurture our students and let them be an active part of the entire institution's activities. With increased influence at the workplace, in school, or at our higher education institutions, we move the activity forward. It is, so to speak, the foundation for the democratic institution that we do things better together. We exchange ideas. We bring in different perspectives to bring out all types of opinions in order to then improve the activity.

When it comes to education, students are very important players in colleges and universities because they are the ones who are to acquire knowledge and get the opportunity to grow as individuals. Therefore, I wonder how the Sverigedemokraterna will act during the autumn budget negotiations, given that there will be nearly 30 percent cuts in student influence for the country's student unions.

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! I have no other opinion than Sigvardsson regarding student influence. Yes, there is probably a nuance of difference. But we do not need to go into that in this exchange of remarks.

The budget is being negotiated, but I cannot go into those negotiations here. It is impossible for me to do that. They are quite intricate negotiations, and they take place somewhat behind closed doors.

But our position is that the student unions shall remain and that the students shall have influence in certain areas. Just as Sigvardsson says, it is democratic education. You give and you take, and sometimes you do not get your way. That is perhaps the most important lesson. We do not always get our way here. Sometimes the buttons are not enough for us, the green buttons. But we want the student unions to remain and that they shall drive student influence.

I have understood that the student unions received extra money during the pandemic. All these pandemic funds are disappearing because the pandemic is over. Extra appropriations that have been received because it is a pandemic or whatever are disappearing afterwards.

We will look closer at this matter regarding the corporations. I promise that, but I cannot say anything about the upcoming budget negotiations. I believe that Sigvardsson knows about that.

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! To close that part about student influence, it is important to point out that of the increase of 30 million kronor that was made during the previous mandate period, 5 million were explicitly money for the corona pandemic. That leaves at least 25 million remaining that should continue and remain for the student unions' activities.

Another part that Member Stenkvist dwelt on in his speech concerned the de-academicization of professional education.

(ROBERT STENKVIST (SD): On the contrary!)

Yes, we need to de-academicize. So that is how I interpreted the members. I perceived it as that the police training was mentioned as an example, but there are indeed very many other professional educations. I am curious about which other professional educations the Sverigedemokraterna are potentially discussing removing from the country's educational institutions and perhaps creating their own educational institutions or similar for. Could it be that it is for preschool teachers but not high school teachers? Aren't all teachers in those professions? Could it be about which part of the social workers should be a part of it? Should social workers be a part of it but not other parts within social work?

It raises quite a few questions and creates a great deal of concern when we as members of the Swedish Riksdag talk about it. Therefore, I would like to let member Stenkvist take these two minutes to perhaps clarify or state which other professions the member actually refers to here. It is important for the long-term security for those who begin studying right now, but also for those who have studied for these important professions all around in our entire society.

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

Robert Stenkvist (SD)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the very good question. I was just waiting for it, I can say. And it was not preschool teachers I was thinking of.

I have read in various places now that since 2010 there has been a violent academicization of the officer training. Officers learn to write very good essays, scientifically grounded essays. They give lectures. They read theory, international relations, and everything. But many officers consider today that they become completely worthless as officers out in the field when it hits.

This is very serious. We live in a restless time. We have war in Europe. We have a restless world. And here we are training officers who will not fulfill their task as they should if things get serious. They are very good at writing essays. They are very good at giving lectures and making theoretical expositions. But they receive no training in what it is like to lead men and women in combat. That is why we train these officers. It is serious.

It is partisan attacks that one receives all the time. They may be exaggerations, but what if there is a great deal in this criticism. Then it is very serious. This applies to officers.

I read about field flyers who get to play Star Wars instead of flying the Gripen because they have to achieve certain academic points. A villain in this is the Bologna process. This should be adjusted in the process. And I am thinking a bit about the police training.

Regarding the preschool teacher training, which Member Sigvardsson mentioned, there has been criticism. I have seen that. However, it was not the one I primarily meant, but this is a very serious problem. It can be a very serious problem that we actually should discuss much more.

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

Lili André (KD)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by moving for the adoption of the committee report and the rejection of all motions.

Today we are debating higher education. It is a report that clearly shows that the government stands firm on the principle of high quality and freedom within academia. The government's line is clear: We shall continue to build upon the strong foundation we have and do so with respect for the universities' autonomy.

In the report, we have been reminded that our universities play a key role in society – not only as educators but also as partners in collaboration for innovation and regional development. Precisely the balance between autonomy and responsibility is something we Christian Democrats want to safeguard.

Madam Speaker! I have had the privilege of studying and working within academia. After an engineering degree, I remained at the educational institution to teach and collaborate with the surrounding society. This took place in close contact with companies, municipalities, and the region. Academia is a fantastic place to study and work. The studies follow a high-quality work, and the opportunity for research studies is great for highly motivated students.

As a student, I entered an environment and came out with a degree and knowledge that provided a good foundation for exciting and interesting work tasks. I am grateful to have had the opportunity to study within higher education and to have been able to work at knowledge-intensive workplaces. That opportunity is great for Sweden's students, and that is something we Christian Democrats safeguard.

This government, Madam Speaker, has initiated several important inquiries. Firstly, it concerns strengthening academic freedom and protecting the opportunity for researchers and teachers to freely explore and teach. We all know that academic freedom is a fundamental pillar in an open and democratic society.

Secondly, we have taken steps to develop the resource allocation for higher education. The goal is a more just and efficient system that provides better conditions for both quality and flexibility and that helps educational institutions to meet new competence needs in a rapidly changing labor market.

Thirdly, it is about expanding the possibilities for lifelong learning and transition. This is very close to my heart. We know that many of today's occupations are changing fundamentally – not least thanks to AI and digitalization. In that regard, the educational institutions must be at the forefront. The Government has therefore clearly stated that the educational offerings of the institutions shall meet the needs of the labor market and support people who want to take new steps in their working lives.

For example, UKÄ has assessed that higher education institutions need to adapt their educational offerings to respond to the new competence needs resulting from the development of artificial intelligence. The need exists for both specialists in the technology and those who work with application.

Madam Speaker! The government's message is that universities and colleges shall have great freedom regarding how they plan and conduct education and research. The students' needs and society's needs shall be guiding for the educational offerings the institution shall provide. The institutions also report to the Ministry of Education which priorities they make and why. I think that is very good so that the government can provide good conditions for development. We listen and have a dialogue with our institutions.

We also want to emphasize international cooperation. Sweden shall be an active part of the world's knowledge exchange – not only to strengthen education and research, but to contribute to democracy and development globally.

The Government is now preparing a proposal to develop national guidelines for secure and responsible international collaborations. It is an important balancing act between openness and security.

(Applause)

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

Anders Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! If one wants to make it very simple, one could say that higher education is about two things. One is that we need to have research that maintains a very high level. The other is that we need to educate and strengthen the competence of our students and of those who continue their studies after a working life in a certain direction.

Centerpartiet has three focus areas within this, which we have mentioned previously. Firstly, it is about academic freedom, secondly about sharper focus in Swedish research, and thirdly about higher education that is accessible throughout the country.

We have debated academic freedom, not least in the recent research proposition debate here in the chamber, so I will let it rest in this debate. I intended instead to focus on higher education available throughout the country.

First, however, I would like to say a few words about an interesting meeting I had on Monday. I was invited to a research department at Chalmers to attend their annual conference. They work with chemistry in various forms and have a chemistry department. I got to listen to research presentations but also discuss research policy.

I also had the opportunity to listen to Professor Marcus Wilhelmsson, whose research group designs fluorescent base analogs for DNA and RNA. The purpose of the research is to develop molecules and methods that facilitate for researchers who want to study the structure and dynamics of nucleic acid molecules as well as their interactions with, among other things, proteins.

Even more interesting, perhaps, was that this research group has started a company – a startup – that is entirely based on their research. One is, therefore, taking research results directly to a company.

This can help patients. We can help society. We are building a company that can go on export and bring in tax revenues for our welfare – this is a mechanism that we would gladly like to see more of in Sweden. It was good to get it partly in one and the same place.

Naturally, it is only an example of how important it is for Sweden to invest in excellence in Swedish research. Something that was also striking, Madam Speaker, is that it is not possible to order a research breakthrough from a political standpoint. This is something that happens within the profession. It happens in research departments when the researchers themselves reflect and discuss what they want to delve deeper into. It is very important, the Center Party believes, to recognize the profession.

Our following discussion came to be largely about how interactions between researchers and politicians can be strengthened and how we politicians can better understand the researchers' conditions. But at least as important – perhaps even more important actually – is how researchers and academia as a whole can better understand the conditions of politics and democracy. I think: May we politicians and researchers together find ways for more mutual understanding.

Madam Speaker! We cannot have world-class research in the entire country, that is actually an unreasonable thought, but accessible higher education in the entire country is just as necessary for our development as the sharpest research.

The competence shortage is very large across the entire country. Furthermore, nothing is so risky as leaving groups aside – both because we miss out on opportunities and because we lower individuals' life opportunities.

The probably largest and most increasing structural inequality in the country is the geographical one: that between cities, suburban municipalities, and rural municipalities. That gap is much larger than, for example, between city and suburb.

Let us look at some figures and correlations. I obtained figures from Statistics Sweden on average wages and municipal tax levels. We can take perhaps the two most extreme municipalities, those at the top and bottom, namely Dorotea and Danderyd. It becomes today's double – DD!

Dorotea has very low wages compared to Danderyd, but when it comes to the municipal tax, it is exactly the opposite; it is much, much higher in Dorotea than in Danderyd. It is therefore a double blow for the countryside. Most interesting is perhaps to look at disposable net income. In Danderyd, one has 1,800,000 kronor net per household to live on, while in Dorotea one has approximately 417,000 kronor. It is an enormous difference between city and countryside.

These were two extremes, but we could compare two other places. Tomorrow I will travel across the country, through Värmland. I live in Lerum, Madam Speaker, and depart from there. There, the disposable net income is 724,000 kronor per household. I will pass, among other places, the Munkfors municipality, which lies north of Karlstad and where the Klarälven winds past. There, the net income is 422,000. That is a difference of 300,000 kronor in net income between two fairly small municipalities, one of which is near a city and one is located in the countryside.

The connection that is interesting for this debate, Madam Speaker, is the education level. In Danderyd, it is over 40 percent who have post-secondary education, while it is 11 percent in Dorotea. When it comes to post-secondary education in Munkfors and Lerum, Munkfors also lies at 10–11 percent, while Lerum lies at 27 percent.

Accessibility to education across the entire country is crucial for small and rural municipalities to be able to grow and thrive. We must direct greater attention toward that connection, Madam Speaker. Higher education should be regarded as an infrastructure just like electricity, water, fiber, and roads. Nurse, teacher, police officer, social worker – yes, the list can be long – are professions that require higher education, and they must actually exist everywhere.

As an example: If we are to give our children equal opportunities in adult life, the school's teachers must have equal skills across the entire country. That is not how it looks today. If we are to develop our entire country and level out injustices, we must strengthen all infrastructure. Access to high-quality higher education in the whole country increases people's opportunities for jobs and security, while we know that it benefits the business sector and our common welfare.

Madam Speaker! For that reason, the universities' connection to the labor market and regional cooperation should be strengthened. The universities are hubs for development and a catalyst for our regions. Alongside a more lively cooperation between universities and local and regional businesses, there is also reason for the universities to design the educations for the needs of the increasingly mobile labor market.

Furthermore, Madam Speaker, in addition to the universities' physical possibilities to offer relevant and high-quality education throughout our country, I want to highlight two other central possibilities.

One is to also be able to take independent courses remotely in the future. We must maintain that possibility. Higher education becomes accessible to more people through distance education.

Add to this the hybrid learning center, where municipalities located some distance from our universities can provide premises and physical locations where students can stay and have a connection with fellow students, while the courses are given in groups digitally from actually any university or any university regardless. Centerpartiet wants this possibility to be noted by more educational institutions.

Finally, Madam Speaker: the Centre Party fights relentlessly for good conditions for all of Sweden, and I therefore move for approval of reservation 2.

(Applause)

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you very much for the speech, Anders Ådahl!

Anders Ådahl emphasized a great deal that there should be higher education of good quality throughout the country. He also mentioned initially that there should be excellence throughout the country. A bit later, however, he said that it cannot be world-class throughout the country, so I have a bit of difficulty reconciling what the member means. Are we to have excellence throughout the country, or are we not to have excellence throughout the country? How are we to reconcile this?

At the same time, we have often had discussions about the fact that we must invest resources based on quality, but Centerpartiet is negative towards that.

I was thinking, then, that I would ask for a small explanation of what the member means.

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

Anders Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! Thank you to the Member for the opportunity to clarify! It is not good if I have been unclear.

There are two issues that differ when we talk about focus and breadth.

One is about research and the quality of research. We must invest in excellence in Swedish research, and we must concentrate resources when it comes to research. We cannot have world-leading chemistry institutions in 25 different locations in Sweden; it is a completely impossible idea. The higher up in the order we go, the more we need to concentrate resources and invest in excellence. That is where excellence and world-class come in.

Then we talk about higher education, and there the Center Party argues that we must build the whole of Sweden. We must make it possible for people living in Munkfors, Borås, Höör and so on to study a higher education – to become a social worker, teacher or civil engineer – without their place of residence and geography hindering them.

I hope that this answer gave the member some clarity as to what we intend in the matter.

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

Marie-Louise Hänel Sandström (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for the explanation, member! I did, however, experience that it was quite unclear when it was to be the tip and when it was to be the whole country. But we agree that it is difficult to get the tip or world-class quality across the whole country and that we must invest resources where the highest quality is found, so I think perhaps we are in agreement on that issue.

Then there was also a question that we have discussed previously, namely the one regarding the cooperation between business and academia. There, the Center has also been a bit hesitant when we have discussed. From the Moderates' side, we say that we want to see much more cooperation between business and academia. We consider it obvious that one must have cooperation, because if the research cannot be used, it is not particularly meaningful.

When we have discussed it with C earlier, one has however been a bit hesitant regarding the cooperation, so I want to ask why that is. Or has the member been unclear there, so that we have misunderstood? I have however not seen that C really wants that cooperation which we consider incredibly important, so therefore is my question if the member can elaborate on that.

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

Anders Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! I also thank you for this opportunity to clarify.

Of course, the Center Party wants to see strong cooperation between academia and the business sector. However, we have pointed out in a number of debates and posts how incredibly important it is that we first invest in really good research. It is only when we have good research that cooperation actually becomes worth something.

Perhaps it is this the member is after, that is, that we have been unclear when it comes to collaboration because we have talked so very much about research and the freedom of research. The quality of research simply sets the standard for the quality in collaboration.

Then there is a certain difference between the more prominent universities and the colleges (högskolor) that exist in the country. I would like to assert that they possibly have slightly different missions. Our universities often act on a global market – they should be able to collaborate with global companies and get startup companies started – while our colleges perhaps many times have a greater need to collaborate regionally and locally. There, therefore, can be a difference.

I hope I am clear even on this issue. The Centre Party is very much in favor of strong cooperation between academia and the business sector.

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

Camilla Hansén (MP)

Madam Speaker! Just a few weeks ago, we debated the government's research proposal in the Education Committee, and at that time we touched upon topics such as academic freedom and other matters that are usually addressed in this motion report. I therefore intended to say something briefly about higher education, on a more general level, and then delve a little deeper into students' health and influence.

I want to start by going back to the Riksdag's research day, which we had some months ago. This year, the day focused on knowledge for the future labor market, and I took a few things away from there.

A formulation that stuck in my head was that we need to see our entire education system as a nationally important infrastructure, in the same way that we talk about roads, railways, defense, and so on. The education system is a nationally important infrastructure that we need to safeguard and nurture.

Something else I was reminded of was that there are still those who believe that few people want to become teachers. I often say that I want more people to dream of becoming teachers, but it is one of the largest programs of education we have. I remind [them] that this is an education that, of course, requires eligibility. However, it is not true that everyone who wants to enter the program actually does. This is one of the most popular professions to train for; I think we should include that, so that students and young people are not deterred from aiming for the country's most important profession.

A third thing I take away from the research day is that we need to educate for knowledge, not for specific professions. It was warned that we are becoming too detailed and directed within higher education. The basis for this is that we do not know which problems we will need to solve. Education and higher education need to provide knowledge that we can use to manage many different challenges that we are faced with without us knowing exactly what these problems will be during the time we are studying or researching.

Madam Speaker! The university's task is to provide education on a scientific or artistic basis and based on proven experience. The university shall also conduct research and artistic research as well as development work. The mission includes cooperating with the surrounding society for a mutual exchange and working to ensure that the university's competence benefits society. There shall be a close connection between education and research, and according to law, the students shall have influence over the education and take an active part in the work of further developing it.

According to the Higher Education Act, it is also the case that the activities at the higher education institutions shall promote sustainable development, which means that current and future generations are assured a healthy and good environment, economic and social welfare, and justice. This is a great mission. I want to emphasize that the higher education institutions have an enormous potential to constitute a strong force in this transition through education, research, cooperation, and the transformation of their own operations. But just like the work of many other actors in society, the institutions' work to promote sustainable development needs to be intensified.

Now I will focus on the students. According to the law, students are to have influence over higher education, which means that the funding for student unions needs to be secured. As we have heard previously, that funding will be cut if the government continues to present budgets in accordance with the forecasts that have been presented previously. In the same way, the government is cutting back on civil society and on popular movements in general. This funding needs to be secured by the government, especially given that the student unions' mandate is statutory.

I also want to mention the students' political engagement. The political student unions are experiencing great difficulties in carrying out activities at educational institutions. They note that the regulations in the Higher Education Ordinance are interpreted in different ways. Almost all student unions have joined forces and addressed the government with the request to clarify that freedom of association also includes political associations on various campuses.

I want the educational institutions to be central places for the important and difficult conversations that we need to have in our society. If we cannot have those debates and engage in that idea development there, what other places should this be done in?

Madam Speaker! Almost regardless of how one measures it, it can be seen that students are worse off mentally than the average population. As a response, there is student health services, but they are often inaccessible. The supply is also very uneven between the higher education institutions. According to a mapping, the institutions have between two and ten employees per 10,000 students. That is quite a large difference, and it really is not much.

It is not uncommon for students to feel so poorly that they have problems with their study results. Missing results lead to missing student grants. Perhaps the studies are then extended by an additional semester, if one even continues. Feeling poorly and having weak personal finances can become a vicious circle where the mental ill-health and the weaker economy reinforce each other. It is a great gain for both society and the individual if one can break that vicious circle. Mental ill-health and interrupted educations involve societal costs that we can prevent.

Miljöpartiet argues that a comprehensive national mapping of students' mental health and the various healthcare providers' areas of responsibility is needed. Measures need to be proposed so that it functions better. Today, students are unnecessarily shuffled between student health services at the higher education institutions and primary care. It is important that student health services can also include concerns that are not directly study-related and that preventive work can be done regarding suicide prevention. We also want to see that students can be referred further to specialist care when needed.

I also want to highlight that the college has a mission that there should be a strong connection between teaching and research. We have had quite a lot of research focus here during the spring. In the Higher Education Act, it is the teaching that comes first – then comes the research, and after that comes the connection. I imagine that the legislator, that is, we here in the chamber, has a point with just that.

If we in Sweden want to call ourselves a knowledge nation of rank – we want the Nobel Prize, I hear – we must ensure that students get enough time with skilled teachers and researchers. It is not enough to call oneself a knowledge nation and at the same time belong to the countries in Europe that have the least amount of teaching time. This will not result in any Nobel Prizes, unless one is very lucky. I would, however, like to see it be based on something other than luck.

Madam Speaker! In conclusion, I would like to return to the beginning. We need to strengthen the education and trust in knowledge itself. It must be able to be used in many different ways to solve problems that we do not yet know about. Therefore, it is important that higher education institutions are given the conditions to conduct higher education and research at a high level.

Then the connection between education and research is needed. Then we need students who are doing well and have good conditions for their studies, with, among other things, strengthened student health. They need to have much contact with good teachers and good researchers. Students' influence also needs to be strengthened, as well as their place in the public debate.

Madam Speaker! I move for the approval of reservation 23 on strengthened student health.

(Applause)

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

Ilona Szatmári Waldau (V)

Madam Speaker! I naturally stand behind all of the Left Party's reservations in this area, but since I am stepping in as a substitute in this debate on short notice, I will stick to what I will move for approval.

On the Gaza strip, all universities have been bombed during the past year. It is part of what many call educide – a warring party deliberately bombs educational institutions and schools in order to thereby destroy the education system.

The University

Vänsterpartiet will always stand up for education as a human right, enshrined in Article 26 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights.

In Norway, a choice has been made to actively engage in enabling studies for Palestinian students and research for Palestinian researchers from Gaza. During the autumn of 2024, the first ten medical students arrived in Oslo to complete their studies.

Norway shows that it is possible to do things to support the education sector in Gaza already now. Even more will, however, need to be done when the war is over. Then the education system will need to be rebuilt as soon as possible so that an entire generation's education is not lost. Vänsterpartiet therefore argues that Swedish higher education institutions should work to assist Palestinian higher education institutions and enable Palestinian students in Gaza to study.

Madam Speaker! I move for approval of reservation 8.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 17 June.)

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