Culture, media, religious communities and leisure

Bo Broman (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin by expressing my approval of the committee's proposed decision.

After eight years of red-green rule, we finally have a new government in place and a blue-yellow budget bill before us. This budget, we Sweden Democrats have been involved in developing together with our coalition partners the Moderates, Christian Democrats and the Liberals. We four parties agree that Sweden has a number of major problems, and we are ready to do what is required to solve these.

This budget, however, is not a magic bullet that will solve all of Sweden's problems within a year, but it is a good start. We maintain the a-kasse levels and the health insurance, we begin the work of lowering fuel prices, and we make a record-breaking investment in the Swedish justice system. We are carrying out these important investments now in an economically difficult period, and it is necessary to carry out the reforms required for Sweden to become good again.

Today we are debating the budget for expenditure area 17 Culture, media, religious communities and leisure. For us Sverigedemokrater, culture plays a central role for our political and ideological foundation. Our culture, the Swedish culture, is fantastic – this is one of the cornerstones that makes Sweden exactly Sweden. For us Sverigedemokrater, culture is more than art and music; it is socially transferable patterns of life that bind us together with former generations. The Swedish culture is also the glue that links all of us who live in Sweden through common cultural reference frames, and it is well worth highlighting and bringing to life. Therefore, we Sverigedemokrater are pleased that, for example, the Swedish National Heritage Board receives an increased grant while funds are granted to Skansen so that they can upgrade their operations. These institutions are just some of all those that bring Swedish culture and cultural heritage to life every day.

Mr. Speaker! On the whole, this is a strong culture budget considering the time we live in. Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine has soon been ongoing for a year. We have skyrocketing inflation and high prices on energy and fuels. But despite this, we can state that we are not making any major cuts to culture. The funds that are disappearing are the pandemic supports that were distributed in previous years. The Agency for Cultural Analysis has in recent days, in a new report, demonstrated that the pandemic supports have had a desired effect: Culture is well on its way in its restart after the pandemic. And despite the tough economic situation, we Sverigedemokrater are including, in nominal terms, the second-largest culture budget ever. This means, despite the times of crisis we are now entering, that culture remains strong.

Mr. Speaker! We Sweden Democrats have also previously had a budget cooperation with our coalition parties, but now that we form part of the basis for the new government, we exert influence over the state budget and the pursued policies in a completely different way. We can see this in several areas, even within this expenditure area. A Swedish cultural canon shall be developed, a proposal that we Sweden Democrats have pushed for a long time in the Riksdag and the Culture Committee. A cultural canon is an important and good cultural policy proposal to elevate the works that have played a particularly large role for Sweden as a country. But a Swedish cultural canon is also a recognition of Swedish culture from a central level, something that the previous government refused to do. We also get an investment in long-term artist scholarships. It is an important investment to ensure security and long-term stability for the artists who receive state scholarships.

Mr. Speaker! Another important point for us Sweden Democrats is to stop the state's granting of subsidies to extremist and Islamist organizations within Swedish civil society. Over the years, we have heard about Muslim congregations that do not allow women to divorce or offer so-called pleasure marriages. We hear about congregations that have invited hate preachers who spew out hate against homosexuals and Jews. Most people think like we do: Such extremist religious communities or civil society organizations should not enjoy public support.

Mr. Speaker! We are now beginning our work with streamlining and reforming folkbildningen (non-formal education). In September, the National Audit Office submitted a report where they reviewed the state subsidies to the studieförbund (study associations). It was not a pleasant read, but the report demonstrates what we Sverigedemokrater have long said about folkbildningen, namely that it is in need of extensive reforms. Therefore, we Sverigedemokrater are satisfied with what is written in the budget regarding the future reforms and streamlining that are to take place within folkbildningen. It is necessary to prevent fraud and irregularities with the taxpayers' money.

Mr. Speaker! Even though I would gladly speak about large-scale cultural policy initiatives, the budget situation is such that it is not the time to promise such initiatives right now. It would not be serious. On the other hand, we maintain a strong culture budget which now returns to the levels that prevailed before corona.

Now we are entering another period of crisis where other measures will need to be implemented. What I can say, however, is that we, together with the government, have the will to reform and budget space for the future. This budget gives culture a stable foundation to rest upon.

In this speech, Jonas Andersson and Leonid Yurkovskiy (both SD) concurred.

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to congratulate Bo Broman on the role of being part of governing Sweden's cultural policy. That is what the role is now.

I have never been of the opinion that the Sweden Democrats will live up to the fundamental cultural policy and democratic principle of arm's length distance. This has been shown, not least during the last few weeks, when the Sweden Democrats have demanded the closure of popular story hours for children and a stop to Lucia processions the other day. Librarians, art and culture workers, and principals have had to endure storms of hate. Regional and municipal representatives have had to take the debate on the freedom of art and culture at the regional and municipal level.

This may not be directly linked to a budget debate, but by reason of the fact that SD has everything to do with government power even if one does not sit in the government - SD even has officials in the Government Offices - we must seize the opportunity to remind the voters who it actually is that governs our country and debate the issues that are highly topical in our area.

The examples I bring up – the stopping of Lucia trains yesterday and the desire to abolish storytime – are entirely orchestrated by representatives of Bo Broman's party at the municipal and regional levels, and they have also received support at the national level. My question is: Will we see more of this type of behavior during this mandate period? How long is this allowed to continue?

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

Bo Broman (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Lawen Redar, for the question! Today we are debating, as mentioned, the budget for 2023. We are not debating the management of culture at a detailed level or at the municipal and regional level.

We obviously stand up for the principle of arm's length. I am happy to have that debate another day, but it does not belong here in the chamber today.

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Mr. Speaker! I, and with the fact that the Tidö Agreement stipulates that this shall form the basis for the entire government's cultural policy, is a remarkable answer I receive here. I thought that this also formed the basis for the cultural policy budget that has been presented.

In his budget speech, Bo Broman points out that there is a desire to stop state support to Islamist and anti-democratic organizations and that this is stated. Yet, this government has withdrawn a bill that could have, here and now, implemented a stop to these supports. This is work that I have been involved in developing, among other things when I sat in the Committee on Justice eight years ago and was involved in working on the strategy against terrorism. Over the past years, this has come to be included in a very large bill. When will we see this implemented?

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

Bo Broman (SD)

Mr. Speaker! When it comes to democratic conditions and the proposition that was withdrawn, I want to say that there were different reasons why it was withdrawn. For our part, it is about that we would like to see democratic conditions in more areas, areas that were not included in the proposition.

The hope is that the bill can be presented again as early as this spring, but as we said, we do not sit in the government and do not control when the government presents bills. But in our party, the hope is that we will be able to see this in the chamber again during the spring.

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

Amanda Lind (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to thank Bo Broman for the speech. It is pleasant to meet in this role in the chamber, where Bo Broman now belongs to the majority and, just as Lawen Redar said, must therefore also bear responsibility for the culture budget.

My first question to Bo Broman relates to Lawen Redar's question regarding the freedom of art. When it comes to the arm's-length distance, I can state that there are many Sweden Democrats who have expressed themselves in a completely different way than Bo Broman over the past few days. We will have that discussion.

There are other issues concerning the freedom of art that also have a direct connection to the budget, for example, the support for artists and artist grants. We know that with good working conditions and good conditions to operate under, the possibility to create freely increases.

Here I am surprised, because Bo Broman's party, Sverigedemokraterna, have in almost all previous budget proposals wanted to cut the artist grants. They have also wanted to take away from the free arts and the support for free groups and allocate it to other initiatives.

Firstly, I wonder: Have the Sweden Democrats changed their policy regarding artist grants?

Secondly, Bo Broman speaks of the cultural sector standing strong and having recovered well. I do not read the report from the Agency for Cultural Analysis in the positive way that Bo Broman does. Neither does a large number of the industry organizations. For example, it is pointed out that the cultural heritage sector has recovered significantly more weakly than certain other sectors. Here, the Sverigedemokraterna have previously spoken of major investments. We see no such things in the budget. What does Bo Broman say about that?

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

Bo Broman (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Amanda Lind, for the question! On Tuesday, October 18, the new government took office. Three weeks later, the budget for 2023 was submitted to the Riksdag. It is a budget that, despite the very short preparation time, is a strong budget that builds Sweden for the future in precisely a time of crisis, which is where we find ourselves. But it is clear that in these three weeks, one did not have time to include everything that we blue-yellow parties want to do. It is a budget that, particularly in the cultural area, is still characterized by Social Democratic content and Social Democratic policy. It is, of course, something that I, as Sverigedemokrat, am not quite satisfied with. The budget for 2024 will look completely different – that I can promise Amanda Lind.

For those who have followed previous budget debates, it is well known that we Sverigedemokrater have a broad cultural policy with completely different priorities than the previous Social Democratic government. We will, of course, in the continued budget work, put forward our demands for more grants to cultural heritage and fewer to contemporary art.

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

Amanda Lind (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Bo Broman for a clear and distinct statement. One moment he speaks well of strengthened artist grants. Now we receive the news that that policy is to look completely different and even decrease if the Sweden Democrats get to decide – we unfortunately know that the Sweden Democrats have the decisive influence over the budget.

This is a message that I think Sweden's artists and cultural creators should listen to very carefully. Here, I naturally place a great responsibility on the government parties that have given the Sverigedemokraterna this influence over cultural policy.

I shall say a few more words about the recovery after the pandemic. Bo Broman has spoken about it being the strongest budget in nominal terms - or the second strongest budget. That is entirely because of the investments that S and MP have made during the time we were in government. It is nothing that Bo Broman's party can take credit for.

I look forward to continued debates, and I truly hope that you will have as little influence as possible over the arts policy moving forward.

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

Bo Broman (SD)

Mr. Speaker! There are many things that affect and have affected the budget work. The first is the political reality that we have to take into account. There is no party in the Riksdag that has its own majority. We do, however, have a majority in the Riksdag for the government's budget. We are four parties that negotiate and produce the budget together. That also means that no party stands alone for the proposals in the budget. It is not a Sverigedemokratisk budget and it is not a Moderate budget, but it is a collaboration, a teamwork, that we have before us.

Then we have an economic reality to take into account. We have a world around us filled with high inflation and high energy prices.

What the budget will look like going forward we will see in about a year, when we meet here again.

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

Amanda Lind (MP)

Mr. Speaker! We are living in a restless time, a time when the struggle for freedom also characterizes our immediate surroundings. What we are now seeing happen in Ukraine, in Iran, in Belarus and in Russia both frightens and gives hope.

It is oppressive, all-powerful regimes that want to rob women, men, and countries of their freedom and their future. It is Russia's unjust invasion of Ukraine. It is Iran's brutal attacks, imprisonment, and threats of mass executions of protesters. It is the oppression of free speech in Belarus and in Russia. Yes, all of it is terrifying.

But brave women and men stand in the wake of Mahsa Amini's death against the Islamist regime for the right not to wear a veil and for their freedom. Ukrainians stand up against Russia's invasion. Journalists, authors, artists, civil society representatives and MR-activists in Russia and in Belarus continue their work tirelessly to open the world's eyes and make the oppression and abuses visible. It gives hope. These voice-bearers, Mr. Speaker, are an indispensable part of the resistance against oppression, but they are also a part of a democratic development.

At the same time as we need to do what we can here in Sweden to support the freedom fighters in these countries, we need to do what we can to strengthen the democratic pillars here in Sweden. By that, I mean primarily free art and culture, a strong civil society, an accessible cultural heritage, independent media and journalism throughout the country, the curiosity of education and the enabling of human growth. I also think of free speech and free thought, which are crucial in a democracy and for people to be able to raise their voices. For all of this, Mr. Speaker, a strong cultural policy with freedom of expression and free culture at the center is needed.

Miljöpartiet has a special statement, as we believe that the government's framework for cultural policy is far too small. I will make some points in our budget motion with a focus on the cultural area.

Mr. Speaker! Public libraries fulfill an extraordinarily important function for education and for equal access to culture and literature throughout the country. The red-green government introduced state support for public libraries which has been much appreciated. Measures to increase accessibility have thus been able to be made, and the libraries have taken a larger place in the local communities.

Mr. Speaker! At the end of 2020, 435 libraries had been closed in the last 22 years. The book collections are decreasing. The number of bookmobiles is decreasing, and we see that the cuts continue. There are, of course, exceptions. Investments are being made in neighborhood libraries, in branches in subway stations, in more open libraries, and in new bookmobiles. These are some examples.

We can see that since 2015, the rate of closures regarding libraries has decreased, and the number of public libraries in 2021 was the same as it was in 2020. The state support for public libraries constitutes an important carrot for such initiatives to be able to take place, Mr. Speaker. It is a marking that public libraries, this bastion of education, are something worth fighting for and worth prioritizing even in bitter times. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, it is very unfortunate that the government chooses to halve the state support to public libraries for the coming years.

We in Miljöpartiet want to see this support doubled and also given a long-term design and financing. It is naturally also completely central that the libraries, as the cultural and educational institutions they are, are given the opportunity to operate without political meddling. The principle of arm's length must be upheld.

Mr. Speaker! Culture and creativity must be a strong part of the upbringing for all children in Sweden. It lays the foundation for knowledge and understanding of our society. And it strengthens children as individuals and as democratic citizens. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child states that all children have the right to participate in cultural and artistic life.

Mr. Speaker! Every day, tens of thousands of children and young people go to the cultural school. For many, it is a safe place to practice standing on stage, playing instruments, dancing, or performing theater. The cultural school contributes to children across our entire country, regardless of level or ambition, getting the opportunity to discover a larger world. It is worth defending.

With the state support for the culture school, which also has been added during the red-green government's time, 33,000 new children and young people have entered the culture school's activities.

To halve the state support for the culture school next year, as the government chooses to do, means a death blow for the work of developing their activities as culture school teachers that is currently being carried out across the country. Half as many projects will receive support next year, and I know that this worries many of the country's culture schools. When the municipalities at the same time do not receive the increased state grants that they see they need to meet inflation and the ongoing recession, well, then the cuts also threaten the culture school. Here, a state culture policy must point out a different direction.

Miljöpartiet wants to increase and also make permanent the state support for the culture school and also review the design of it so that we can avoid the short-term projects and be able to incorporate all the good experiences that have been gathered over the years that have passed – all new methods that have been able to be tested, all new artistic expressions that have been able to be included in the culture school, all children who do not have the same opportunities and whose parents' wallets perhaps have not previously given them the opportunity to participate in the culture school.

We want to give these children a better opportunity to participate in the activities of the culture school, Mr. Speaker, and therefore it is a priority for Miljöpartiet to safeguard and strengthen this grant.

Mr. Speaker! The Corona pandemic hit culture hard. The Restart Investigation pointed out the need for long-term support for the recovery. Culture was one of the sectors hit hardest after the pandemic, precisely because culture is built on encounters between people - in the orchestras, at the rehearsals, between teachers and students at the culture school, and between the ensemble and the audience at a theater performance. We are all very happy that it is now possible to experience culture again, fully and completely, both digitally and physically.

We allocated many billions in support during the years in government, both in acute crisis support and in large restart support, and it is clear that these large supports have been directly decisive for why we are now beginning to see certain tendencies toward recovery and that employment is increasing within the cultural sector. We know that there are many operations that would have collapsed if the crisis and restart supports had not been provided.

Svensk Scenkonst considers the government's restrained culture budget to be problematic in this regard. Many operations are in a long and laborious restart after the pandemic. One would have liked to see continued restart support and clear investments so that culture can recover. The same message is received from, for example, Fackförbundet Scen & Film and Riksförbundet Sveriges museer.

It is good that the government has allocated 40 million kronor for strengthened artist grants. It is positive. It was the Restart Inquiry's proposal, and it is a proposal that we in Miljöpartiet share. But it is only a small part of everything that the Restart Inquiry proposed. Where are the restart grants for the free groups, for dance, theater and music, for the creative industries, for handicrafts, for the visual and formal arts, for all the country's museums? Where are the permanent reinforcements that the Restart Inquiry points out are so important specifically for a long-term recovery?

It is positive that we can see glimpses of light now. But what happens when all the support that has existed actually disappears now, when inflation and a recession risk affecting the culture's recovery even more, and when the need for investments is so much greater? Where, Mr. Speaker, are the investments in cultural heritage? The museum sector now faces double challenges – to regain visitors after the pandemic, while the need is crying out for both digitalization and renovation of the physical environments.

It is also unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, that the government does not allocate more money to the regional and municipal sectors. We know that a large part of cultural life is financed municipally and regionally, not least the public libraries and the culture school, which we have already mentioned, but also the support for voluntary culture and for all the important regional institutions such as county museums and regional theaters. Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner speaks of needs in the 20 billion class, and that providing only 6 billion means that the risk of cuts is great. Then, Mr. Speaker, the national cultural policy needs to lead the way and show that culture is an important welfare area.

The Green Party does this in its budget motion. We have a multitude of different reinforcements, among others, in order to be able to implement the proposals of the Restart Inquiry. We do not think it is the time to wait for better times during the mandate period, but we must here and now provide the support that is needed so that culture can truly recover. Now is the time.

Mr. Speaker! These were some highlights from the Green Party's budget motion on this expenditure area. We will return in continued debate to other parts. I want to conclude by saying that the budget is not only about figures but also about providing an indication, a direction, towards which the priorities for the government as a whole point and what the Minister for Culture will work for during the years to come. I can unfortunately state that the government's budget for 2023 lacks those types of indications as well as ambitions.

In times of recession and inflation in a restless world, we need culture the most, and we need to show our support for cultural life. This is failing. Support is being cut for public libraries and for the cultural schools. One is removing almost all restart support and making it harder and more expensive for people to participate in cultural heritage, and one is cutting the budget for the folk high schools when people so much need education in order to then be able to enter the workforce.

Mr. Speaker! It would have been possible to prioritize differently. That is what the Green Party does. For us, a strong and rich cultural life is important both for its inherent intrinsic value and because it is a supporting part of both welfare and democracy, and is therefore well worth investing in.

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

Roland Utbult (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Amanda Lind for her speech and would like to begin by correcting and qualifying the picture that we on the government side are halving the support for the culture school. Actually, it is the case that we are restoring the support to the level that existed before the pandemic. There is 100 million there, and I think it is a bit wrong when one simply says that we are halving the support. It is the pandemic support that has existed which is now being removed, quite simply.

It was not actually for that reason I requested the floor, but to speak about the very large difference between the Green Party's culture budget and the government's. It is a lot of money. When I read all the tables, I become very interested in where you in the Green Party are getting all this money from. Which taxes are to be raised? Is money to be borrowed? Taken as a whole, if one looks at the entire budget, it is a very large difference.

I can almost become a little jealous when one says that they have nearly 3 billion more than the government to invest in culture. But I actually become even more worried considering the inflation that it could mean and which hits households so that it becomes more expensive to live on because money is borrowed for the state or taxes are raised that hit households. I would like to have answers to that.

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

Amanda Lind (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I can start with the last question. This is naturally evident in our entire budget proposal. I can, however, please Roland Utbult by stating that we also have proposals in our budget that clearly dampen inflation, ranging from powerful investments in the climate to energy efficiency. We also have some increased taxes, which can also function as inflation-dampening.

I particularly do not think that we should see investments in culture as something unusual or something that we should have to be ashamed of here in the chamber. I think it is important that all parties now stand up for culture's need for investments. All the areas that I spoke about in my speech are those that are easy to talk about. It is important with the culture school, and it is important with the public libraries. But then one must also dare to put the money behind those words.

I am pleased that Roland Utbult also highlights so clearly here that we are at quite high levels in the government's budget after the pandemic. This is because S and MP, with coalition partners, have worked for many years to push up the culture budget in order to be able to invest in artists, in culture schools, and in public libraries.

Since then, this expenditure area has become larger. It also concerns everything from media support to civil society. Here I can state that you in Kristdemokraterna have a number of reinforcements in your budget that we are positive about, for example when it comes to investments to counteract loneliness among the elderly.

When it comes to support that is ending, it is still the case, Roland Utbult, that one must take a stand before each budget when a support ends. We in Miljöpartiet went to the election on a platform to extend and also strengthen the support for both culture schools and public libraries. You choose to act so that it is halved before next year. That is a fact.

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

Roland Utbult (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I hear that you in Miljöpartiet are actually quite satisfied with the budget that the government has presented because you have participated, you claim, in it. In some way, it then becomes even stranger that you allocate 3 billion more than the government to culture.

I have looked into which taxes it is that you intend to raise. I would like to address some of that.

It is about tax on labor and state income tax. They are to be raised, so also municipal income tax, tax on capital, tax on consumption and inputs, energy tax, carbon tax and other taxes on energy and environment and tax on road traffic.

Yes, then perhaps there are funds for the large difference between the government's budget and the Green Party's. I might not have the decimal completely correct, but according to information, it concerns a difference of 130 billion, in total in the budget, which is quite strange and noticeable.

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

Amanda Lind (MP)

Mr. Speaker! That in times of a record-low national debt, borrowing in order to make long-term climate investments to both meet climate goals and press down costs for the citizens is proposed not only by Miljöpartiet but also by institutes and prominent researchers.

It is about priorities - exactly right, Roland Utbult. That we, just like other opposition parties, choose not to proceed with the automatic indexing of the tax cut is a priority. We think it is better to spend that money on welfare in this situation.

Culture has had it incredibly tough during the pandemic. Therefore, we think it is important that we move forward with the proposals that have been put forward so that the cultural life can recover.

I can observe, when I look at the development of the culture budget during previous parliamentary terms, that during the years 2010-2014, when I know the Alliance government made very large tax cuts and invested in, for example, the earned income tax credit, the culture budget was increased by a little over 400 million. During the years 2014-2022, when the red-green government was in power, we increased the culture budget by over 2 billion.

It is about priorities. We stand up for culture.

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

Kristina Axén Olin (M)

Mr. Speaker! I must say that I am a bit surprised. We do indeed have very many agencies under the cultural portfolio, but we have an agency called the Agency for Cultural Analysis which only a couple of weeks ago presented the latest figures on the cultural area.

In that report, one can read, Mr. Speaker, that the cultural school received 2 859 000 000 kronor last year. And it is the municipalities that finance the cultural school. Then the Riksdag did, admittedly, establish a special state development grant, which last year was 200 million. This government has had to reduce that to 100 million. With that, it is still the case that 2 859 000 000 kronor come from the cultural sector to the cultural school.

I think it is shameful, Mr. Speaker, that one then speaks of a slaughter of culture and a halving of the money for the culture school. We have 177,400 children studying in the culture school. The 100 million kronor that one takes away corresponds to 5 kronor and 60 öre per student. I do not believe that our students in the culture school think it is shameful when millions of people in Ukraine are starving and have no electricity.

That we choose to cut by 100 million in a budget of almost 3 billion is not cutting the money for the culture school in half, Mr. Speaker. I am surprised that Amanda Lind has not read the report from the Swedish Agency for Cultural Analysis so that she can instead use real figures in the debate.

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

Amanda Lind (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I thought it was clear that in my speech I spoke about the state support for the culture school, which is halved to next year from 200 million to 100 million.

I also said that the municipalities account for the majority of the funding, just as Kristina Axén Olin says. And I said that it is worrying when the government comes forward with support to municipalities and regions with state grants of only 6 billion when they themselves see a need for approximately 20 billion.

I said in my speech that this creates a risk for cuts to the culture school. We know, Mr. Speaker, that the culture school is an activity that is not mandated by law. In times of recession and in times of crisis, municipal politicians tend to, out of necessity, because they may not see any mandated activities that they can cut into, try to minimize and reduce the resources for, for example, the culture school.

This is not something one does out of ill will, I believe. The cultural school is loved by the population and by very many municipal politicians. Therefore, it would have been important, as I also said in my speech, if we at the national level could have shown the way when it comes to the state grants to the municipalities, naturally, but also the state support that we know has made so many development projects possible and has been so appreciated all around the country.

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

Kristina Axén Olin (M)

Mr. Speaker! I think Amanda Lind must use the correct figures. It becomes completely wrong proportions if one says that a budget of 3 billion is halved.

(AMANDA LIND (MP): I did not say that.)

In the actual work, it is the state grant of 200 million that is halved, not the budget for the culture school - as teachers in the culture school now seem to believe, Mr. Speaker, because I receive emails where they write that it is claimed that we have halved the budget for the culture school. That is not correct.

In addition, one can read the following in this report, which is very interesting and which I recommend to the committee: "When it comes to the municipalities' expenditures, the trend in recent years has been steadily increasing expenditures for general cultural activities and the music and culture school. The expenditures for libraries and support for the study organizations have been more stable. The latter area, however, received a significant supplement both during 2020 and 2021" - from the municipalities.

It is not the case, Mr. Speaker, that culture is being slaughtered because we are not allocating even more billions here in this chamber. We have naturally had to prioritize the war we have and to help Ukraine. Aside from the electricity crisis, it is inflation and a number of other problems that Sweden faces. But to claim that the money for culture is halved is to state an untruth, Mr. Speaker.

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

Amanda Lind (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I just want to repeat once again that I have not said that. It is the state support for the culture school that is being halved, and that was very clear in my speech.

The Minister for Culture has previously expressed in the debate that they truly safeguard this support and that they are positive about having been able to protect these 100 million kronor that were already in the budget. But when I look back, I know that in 2019 M and KD cut the support for the culture school. We had to put great effort into reintroducing it. In previous budgets, M has completely removed it.

Should I interpret Kristina Axén Olin's statement as that one does not actually see this state support as so important? Just like Bo Broman's support for artist scholarships, perhaps it is a bit shaky and risks disappearing in next year's budget. Can Kristina Axén Olin give an answer as to whether the Moderaterna will stand up for this important grant to the culture school and also make it permanent moving forward?

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

FÖRSTE VICE TALMANNEN

Now this was a closing remark, so there is unfortunately no possibility for Kristina Axén Olin to respond to this right now.

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

Kristina Axén Olin (M)

Mr. Speaker! Sometimes one can get the impression that culture is about what we say in this chamber and the state funds we allocate. But thankfully, that is not the case. Culture is so much more than what we decide in the state budget.

I believe, in itself, perhaps not that we in here have exactly the same perception of what culture is. What for one is books is for another to study art or to go to a concert. But I believe everyone can agree that culture is an indispensable part of our society, and incredibly important.

What is rarely spoken about, Mr. Speaker, is that alongside some state initiatives, culture and the cultural sector are part of Swedish business. The creative and cultural industry consists of 130,000 companies. Over 190,000 employees in Sweden work in the cultural and creative industry with a turnover of over 400 billion.

Here, the state has a responsibility that we should discuss much more in the Riksdag. How can we facilitate and create conditions for thriving companies in the cultural industry? We must discuss taxes, VAT, intellectual property, copyright, sickness benefits, and an additional series of issues if we want to create the best opportunities for this fantastic industry to be able to employ even more people and flourish even more.

We are all here also proud of, for example, Sweden's music export successes which surely are due to the fact that we have had a fantastic cultural school for decades - what was previously the municipal music school. Here in the House, we can discuss how to ensure that we have trained teachers to continue this fantastic development and help the music industry continue to be good at putting Sweden on the world map.

Mr. Speaker! Culture extends across incredibly many areas in politics, which we all too rarely discuss in this chamber. I look forward to participating in discussions during the mandate period on how we can help achieve an even more flourishing culture in Sweden.

The state naturally has a responsibility for our cultural heritage and our national stages. There is a neglected need right now for, among other things, renovation. But in times of war in Europe with a Ukraine where millions of people do not even have electricity and food, and where we in Sweden have an energy crisis that means people actually have to leave houses and homes, then the government cannot prioritize culture, even if we would wish that more could be done to help our national stages, Skansen, and others that have a neglected renovation need.

Mr. Speaker! In conclusion, I look forward to hopefully reaching a situation where the war in Ukraine ends and we get to deal with the energy problems in Sweden so that we can return to a more normal time for the Swedish Riksdag, but we are not there yet.

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Mr. Speaker! There was a very interesting debate here earlier regarding the funding and conditions of the cultural school. The analysis that was highlighted was completely correct. The report from the Swedish Agency for Cultural Analysis has truly shown that during the eight years the government was led by the Social Democrats together with the Green Party, enormous investments were made. Welfare initiatives in municipalities and regions meant that it was possible to expand the cultural budgets municipally and regionally, and it was also an incredibly expansive cultural budget at the national level that was presented year after year.

But despite that, we have had challenges with the culture school. Over 30,000 children are in the queue. Many want to enter the activities. The large investigation that was conducted on the culture school's activities concluded that it should primarily be a municipal matter and be financed in that way, but that the state can assist when it comes to developing the activities and reaching those groups who perhaps have not entered the culture school's activities.

It has been a very popular contribution, and it cannot be stated otherwise than that this government is removing the 100 million that was a special initiative by reason of a restart support. As the situation is now, many young people have, due to the corona pandemic, become sedentary and stayed at home. It has been tough for them to return to the activities that have been offered to children and young people.

One of the activities is precisely the culture school, which in the future would need a restart support to reach the children and young people who have now ended up even further from the culture school's activities. Why is there a cut of 100 million that could have been used to reach the children and young people who, due to the pandemic, have moved far away from the activities' interventions and have not been given the opportunity to enter the culture school?

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

Kristina Axén Olin (M)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Lawen Redar, for an interesting question! In the government's budget, we have allocated 6 billion more to the municipalities, if I don't remember incorrectly. It is the municipalities that have the responsibility for the cultural school. And as I said in my speech, Mr. Speaker, no one would be happier than I if we had more money to spend on the cultural school. I believe that it is often an investment that makes more children find their way to music as a special language.

But there is war in Ukraine, an enormous crisis here at home in Sweden, and high inflation. We are heading into a recession. People are even forced to leave their houses and homes because they cannot afford to pay the electricity bill. In such a time, it is difficult to prioritize even more state funding for municipal music schools, which is a municipal mandate.

Still, the government is making several initiatives in the budget, for example, on developing a leisure card to get more children and young people to move. There are specific assignments for the cultural school and sports to try to reach children in areas of exclusion in different ways. I hope that times will be different if it is the case that even more state support is needed, but primarily these tasks are municipal.

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Mr. Speaker! I do not doubt Member Kristina Axén Olins commitment to, above all, music and children's and young people's access to it. But the Moderate-led government has allocated fewer resources to the cultural school - that is a fact. One will not reach the children and young people who, by reason of a restart, would actually need more resources now.

Reference is also made to investments in welfare. SKR has stated that 20 billion is required if municipalities and regions are to be able to maintain current levels in, among other things, culture budgets. The government is allocating 12 billion and prioritizing high-income earners in our country. That is how this budget looks.

I want to ask a question at the end of this exchange. It was raised by the Sweden Democrat member but also by Kristina Axén Olin that a special investment is being made in Skansen. I do not find it among the appropriations. What kind of investment is it? Have I misunderstood the statement?

We Social Democrats are adding 10 million more to the renovation needs that Skansen has. Are the Moderates making any specific investment in the budget regarding just Skansen?

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

Kristina Axén Olin (M)

Mr. Speaker! We probably have to return to some parts, but when it comes to the last question, I think it is interesting that Lawen Redar brings it up, because I too was quite shocked when I heard the CEO of Skansen tell that the postponed renovations would cost 150 million and that the money should have been received ten years ago.

Unfortunately, we have not allocated any specific funds in our budget for the renovation needs that the CEO John Brattmyhr reported in the media the other day. But it is clearly deeply concerning that Skansen has such a neglected renovation need.

Lawen Redar unfortunately has no more posts now, but I can wonder why the Social Democrats, who nevertheless held power, have not done anything about Skansen's renovation needs, which according to John Brattmyhr should have been addressed many years ago.

Why has a decision not been made regarding a new opera house when it is so bad in Operan? It was Lena Liljeroth who commissioned the investigations into building a new opera house or renovating Operan. It is so bad that one has to set up nets because stones fall down from the ceiling, and one has to pump out water that flows in from the Strömmen.

It has been a period of economic boom, and the state's finances have been stable. Why then have the Social Democrats, with their Green Party-leaning culture ministers, not done anything regarding either Skansen or the Opera, Mr. Speaker? I find that quite sad.

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

Amanda Lind (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I intended to request the floor, because something went wrong in the previous exchange. I asked a question to Kristina Axén Olin about the cultural school and whether the Moderates now, unlike in 2019 when the state support for the cultural school was completely removed, stand behind that support and are also prepared to extend and make it permanent. It would be an important announcement to the country's cultural schools. Right now, the 100 million are only for next year.

The second question I intended to ask Kristina Axén Olin concerns cultural and creative industries. I share member Kristina Axén Olin's commitment to KKN policy. I also felt that this was an issue where we could reach an agreement during the previous mandate period, when it came to the various crisis supports for culture. Not least the Moderaterna were spokespersons for securing support that also works for self-employed individuals and entrepreneurs within the cultural sector. I thank you for that commitment.

What does Kristina Axén Olin see more concretely there? The restart investigation had proposals within the KKN area. I do not see any such budget investments, but the Moderaterna may have other ideas in this area. My question is how you concretely intend to proceed with the KKN work.

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

Kristina Axén Olin (M)

Mr. Speaker! I assume Amanda Lind is speaking about the cultural and creative industries. I am not sure that everyone knows what KKN means.

To begin with the first question, the budget we have decided on now is the budget for next year. I cannot stand here and promise what upcoming budgets will look like. That naturally depends on what happens both in the world and in Sweden. We cannot speak of any definitive decisions regarding the state extra investment that was made in the form of a development grant to the culture school.

But, Mr. Speaker, I repeat what I have said: The culture school is a municipal task. The municipalities spend almost 2.9 billion on the culture school. What was done from the state and the Riksdag's side was to establish a special development grant which, as was stated from the very beginning, would run for a few years so that the culture school could find new methods and perhaps reach new groups. That the grant is halved at a time when, as was said, there is war in the world and also a crisis here at home, I do not think is so strange. It is 5 kronor per student we are talking about - that the grant is halved should not mean that culture is ruined in Sweden.

I simply have to come back to it regarding whether there is a possibility for state development funds further ahead, once we see what the budget situation looks like for 2024.

Mr. Speaker! I am receiving questions regarding the cultural and creative industries. It concerns both VAT, taxes, copyright, and intellectual property rights. We are eagerly awaiting the investigation that will come regarding what could hopefully facilitate things for combinators within the cultural sector, who combine their services in different ways. They have problems today with both sickness benefit and other things.

There is an incredible amount that we should do, that we perhaps should discuss and devote time to instead of spreading myths about a culture that is destroyed. I look forward to it!

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

Amanda Lind (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I hear that Kristina Axén Olin is not so passionate when it comes to the support for arts schools. This may be in line with the fact that the Moderaterna completely cut it off a few years ago.

It is exactly as Kristina Axén Olin says, a development support, and it has meant a great deal of positive for the operations, not least because children and young people who have been far from the culture school can be given the opportunity to test it and to enter the culture school's activities. What Miljöpartiet says is: Let us take part in the positive experiences of the support, and let us make it permanent and find new forms for it. That is what we would like to see - not that it is removed and it is said that it was temporary. One always has the opportunity to reconsider that type of decision.

When it comes to KKN, I am pleased that Kristina Axén Olin brings up the SGI investigation. It was Miljöpartiet that was involved in pushing it forward - an important step, not least now after the pandemic, when it has become painfully clear how difficult it is for many cultural creators and combinators. This is something that I believe both Kristina Axén Olin and I have been aware of for a very long time, but now we must move forward.

Several other important investigations are also underway regarding the creative and cultural industries. It concerns the safety systems, where there are now three different investigations on the table, which are to be completed during the mandate period, and regarding the strategy for creative industries that has been developed, also on the initiative of our government.

I am closely following what is happening here and truly hope that there can be substantial reinforcements and improvements in this area. It would be good for Swedish cultural life.

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

Kristina Axén Olin (M)

Mr. Speaker! I look forward to these investigations coming and to us having a discussion on how we can in different ways contribute to the industry receiving better conditions and being able to flourish even more. But I also note that in the foreword to the government investigation on creative Sweden which was published in August, it points out the volatility and lack of decisions that have prevailed over the last ten years regarding the cultural area; it is hoped that this will come to an end.

I look forward to many positive and hopefully pragmatic discussions with Amanda Lind on these issues.

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Mr. Speaker! Last week, I led a conversation at the ABF house here in Stockholm about children's upbringing conditions in an increasingly unequal Sweden. One of the panel participants was Nicolas Lunabba, author, summer speaker on P1, and operations manager for the organization Hela Malmö. The conversation revolved around his much-discussed book Blir du ledsen om jag dör?, which depicts what it means to take on a child growing up in an area where the social fabric has been torn apart, where poverty manifests in school by students eating a larger meal for lunch. It is an area where the children know they attend society's worst school and, worst of all, an area where children murder and are murdered. What does it do to children to grow up in areas characterized by unemployment, overcrowding, poor school results, and crime?

Nicolas described researcher Abraham Maslow's pyramid of children's basic needs. It is about the physiological needs, such as food on the table, about the community that love and friendship provide, and about how these levels lay the foundation for strengthening the individual's self-esteem and empowerment through safety, security, and stability, to ultimately enable a young person's self-actualization - a realization of everything one wants and can be.

The boy that Nicolas took on, Elijah, is a basketball professional in the USA today, while his friends unfortunately have either been murdered or have murdered.

Two other authors draw corresponding conclusions. In the book Tills alla dör, the journalist Diamant Salihu describes a hopeless, endless, meaningless series of tragedies in the wake of the spiral of violence.

Lawyer Evin Cetin has released a new book, Mitt ibland oss, about young boys from immigrant families, born and raised in Sweden's suburbs, who have ended up far from their parents' original culture. Instead, they have been raised by men to whom they sell drugs. She calls them the drug trade's child soldiers, and they are victims of the criminal world's greatest shame: the exploitation of children to avoid punishment themselves. But she also describes the society's actions, with harsher punishments for 16-year-olds, which causes criminals to now recruit 11-year-olds. This is a cynical and utterly terrifying exploitation of society's youngest.

Mr. Speaker! According to these three authors, it is palpable that the children who are recruited rarely have parents who are there for them to drive them to extracurricular activities or read homework with them. The typical victim of crime is the child who lacks a present father and has a single mother with poor finances. According to Rädda Barnen, the poorest children in Sweden are those who live with a single-parent provider. It is 196,000 children who live in what is designated as child poverty.

The trend is clear. The economic gaps in Sweden are increasing. The poorest families with children are falling behind while the majority have had it better. It can also be observed that the welfare and tax policy profile that has prevailed from the 1990s until today, with marketization of the school, profit extraction in welfare and capital income exceeding labor income, has primarily benefited those who are already well-off in society.

Mr. Speaker! When we Social Democrats present our alternative to the national budget, we start from the point that those who are hit hardest by high inflation, already increased interest rates, high electricity prices, and an impending recession are those who are in the toughest position. Real wages are being eroded, and the economic reality is pressing directly into the finances of families with children. The consequences risk being more children in child poverty and reduced opportunities for leisure activities such as sports, cultural school, and the like.

The right-wing government's budget is not just a string of broken promises. It also clearly shows what the Sweden Democrats and the governing parties prioritize: to make things easier for those who are best off.

The high inflation means that the threshold for paying state income tax is raised. More high-income earners will avoid the state income tax of 20 percent. For someone who earns 60,000 kronor a month, it results in a tax reduction of 1,300 kronor a month. Is it really a necessary priority here and now?

Even the Minister for Culture has expressed that one must have a restrained budget. Why does that not apply to those in society with the absolute highest work incomes?

Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats chose to abolish this calculation, which, according to the language used by the Moderates, is to raise the tax.

Furthermore, government representatives say that they are investing in welfare. But what will happen and what the Swedish people will feel is fewer staff and fewer resources for our welfare, for the children, and for culture.

SKR argues that 20 billion are required to maintain the current quality and standard of welfare, but the Sweden Democrats, the Moderates, the Christian Democrats and the Liberals are investing 12 billion. We are therefore facing imminent cuts.

The national right-wing budget will also have an impact on the culture budgets at the municipal and regional levels and thus affect the basic funding of, among other things, the culture school, public libraries, sports clubs, civil society, and locally citizen-driven meeting places – actually all the activities that our youngest need to meet adult role models and cultivate their self-actualization.

Our budget proposal entails a doubling of the general state grants to welfare, an increased child allowance during the tough winter months, a powerful investment in social services to counter the recruitment of young people into crime, and over 1 billion to support the schools that face the greatest challenges.

Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats prioritize welfare, because we know that it is the single most important factor for leveling differences in living conditions. Therefore, our proposal for the culture budget is a matter of welfare for children and young people.

We are adding 600 million more to the culture budget, and the priorities we make are the following.

We are allocating 100 million more than the government for the cultural school's development grant, which results in an investment of a total of 200 million kronor.

We want children to be able to borrow instruments at home, that more children get to meet engaged educators, and that more children are given the opportunity for a leisure time filled with education, culture, and music. The consequences of the government's cutbacks will be told more about by my colleague Kristoffer later in the debate.

We allocate 100 million more than the right-wing government for sports for children and young people and invest a total of 200 million kronor. What can be more important and fun than that we together expand the opportunities for children to participate in the activities that have the lowest thresholds and which provide both competitive training and organizational training according to the Swedish folk movement tradition? Here, however, we must address the skewed recruitment expressed by the fact that boys play more sports than girls and that children of more affluent parents play more sports than other children.

The grassroots movement background and the non-profit commitment mean that sports engage parents, and it therefore becomes an important place for newcomers to encounter Sweden's association life and people who have lived and worked in our country significantly longer than they have.

We also write in our budget proposal that it is high time to investigate the issue of a construction fund in Sweden. The Culture Committee made an interesting study visit to Denmark during the last parliamentary term, and we know that the municipalities have strained conditions to be able to build sports arenas or renovate existing ones. It is therefore high time to start looking at this issue and see if there is an opportunity for the national level to provide support.

We are allocating 200 million more than the government for adult education to reach, above all, the young people who may not have completed basic education, the young people who need a second chance, or the young adults who are furthest from the labor market in an impending recession.

We also want the study associations to be able to develop their democracy, culture, and educational work, which reaches almost everyone in our country.

Of course, we want to maintain free admission to state museums, which means that families with children can together take part in art, culture, and the Swedish cultural heritage. I think it is so incredibly sad that, in these difficult economic times for families with children, coffers are being built up at our state museums. During the years with free admission, we succeeded in lowering the thresholds for people who might not have otherwise gone to a museum and also awakened curiosity for Swedish culture among tourists and other visitors to Sweden. The right-wing government's proposal seems to be that the children should go to museums themselves.

My colleague Louise will speak more about this reform in her speech.

We also add an extra 10 million to Skansen because there is an acute need for renovations there in order to ensure that this important and popular cultural heritage can be maintained. It may not be the appropriation that Skansen requests, but it is in any case a start to be able to address the most acute issues. I note that the government basis does not allocate a single krona to this.

I also react to the Sweden Democrats' priorities. For many years, they have built up expectations that Swedish cultural heritage should be prioritized. But now they are backing out of everything regarding what finances this.

Art and culture require special efforts in a time of restart after the pandemic and a lack of ticket revenue due to the households' strained economy and increased electricity costs. Here, we invest a total of 90 million so that Sweden's art and culture creators can recover.

Mr. Speaker! We seem to be back in the classic economic formulation of the present day. While the right-wing conservatives facilitate for well-established high-income earners, we Social Democrats do everything in our power to alleviate the crisis that has now arisen for Sweden's families with children in the wake of poorer economy, increased electricity prices, and inflation. We are of the opinion that children and young people should not be punished in the economic crisis. Well-chosen priorities would have been to support Sweden's future.

The Social Democrats are not participating in the decision, but I refer to our specific statement in the report.

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

Roland Utbult (KD)

Mr. Speaker! The possibility of borrowing a guitar, trumpet, or some other instrument at the cultural school will not be changed by the government's budget. As Member Kristina Axén Olin said earlier, the municipalities invest a lot of money in the cultural school, and it will be possible to continue to borrow a guitar even with our budget, which provides 100 million to the cultural schools.

But that is not why I asked for the floor. The Christian Democrats have launched and driven the issue of a leisure card, and we have debated that many times here. It started as a leisure allowance, but that idea was rejected by the government at the time because the leisure allowance was only directed at children who were connected to social services. Instead, they wanted a general welfare.

It was therefore changed to a leisure card which, according to the presentation I made earlier, is given to all children in grades 5-9 and is loaded with 500 kronor. At that time, I perceived that the government parties shifted and became more positive towards the leisure card. But now the Social Democrats are saying no to the leisure card. Why?

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Member Roland Utbult, for the question! It is quite true that we have debated the designation fritidskort many times with great interest.

We Social Democrats are of the opinion that the crisis is here and now. It is now that one needs to invest in families with children. It is now they need support and help. It is not the time to prioritize those people who already have good economic conditions to manage the crisis. It is high time to instead direct the resources to those who need it the most, hence a budget of 100 million extra for the cultural school and 100 million for sports activities to support all activities that can reach children and young people. It is also for that reason we increase the appropriation for welfare - to ensure that there are no powerful cuts, which we now risk seeing in the municipal administrations that direct their work towards the cultural area.

Regarding the leisure card, I note in the budget that first 50 million kronor are to be allocated this year to investigate the issue or build infrastructure for the leisure card. But children do not sit and wait a whole year for an infrastructure that is to come, children need interventions here and now. This is the reason why we think it is a poor prioritization. Children must get out into leisure activities here and now. Instead, they now have to sit and wait a whole year until the right-wing parties have built up their infrastructure with 50 million kronor and then see if there will be any leisure card at all for 2024. I mean that this wait cannot be prioritized.

But we shall see. An investigation into the infrastructure is to be ready by 2024. Then we will know how the leisure card is to be designed and expanded, and then we as a party can take a position on how we view the matter.

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

Roland Utbult (KD)

Mr. Speaker! The leisure card is being phased out, Lawen Redar. If the strategy is developed during 2023, which I expect MUCF will do, and the card is introduced as planned on January 1, 2024, it must be said to be record-fast. It is fantastic, almost rocket speed.

I hear in the member's speech a commitment to children and young people and to people living in vulnerability, but I cannot quite reconcile it. It is spoken of how children and young people living in vulnerability need help and support now and so on. But as I said, the leisure card will be moving forward, and it is aimed at children and young people living in vulnerability.

I do not know exactly what the card will look like, but generally, a card can be loaded for very many children, for example, everyone in certain grade levels. There has been talk of 500 kronor previously, but in previous deliberations regarding children living in vulnerability and who are connected to social services, it has been about up to 2,500 kronor. I do not understand how the Social Democrats can reject this. I really want to ask the parliamentary group leader to have a conversation with those concerned within the Social Democrats to get a changed view on this, because it will be a success in Sweden. I am convinced of that.

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

Lawen Redar (S)

Mr. Speaker! We do not reject the proposal. We reject that 50 million kronor are being spent here and now to investigate an infrastructure for the leisure card.

The major funding for the leisure card is to come in 2024; that is how I read the right-wing parties' budget. But a year's wait in a child's life is a long time, and investments in sports would have needed to come now, as well as investments in the cultural school. That funds are being built up for, among other things, the Nationalmuseum, where entire families with children can visit the activities, is what is happening here and now.

A year in a child's life is a long time when there is a lack of leisure activities and opportunities to realize oneself and one's interests and to meet educators who want what is best for children and young people. It is needed here and now.

The right-wing government has chosen to prioritize high-income earners. That is how their budget looks, and I regret this. But I do not reject the leisure card for 2024, rather I reject the 50 million kronor that one has chosen to invest here and now in the infrastructure for the expansion of the card. We would much rather have these funds go to sports, to the cultural school, and to all other activities that would here and now promote children's and young people's leisure activities.

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

Roland Utbult (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I vote in favor of the committee's proposal for a decision.

Sweden is in a tough economic situation. We are heading towards an economic winter with high inflation and weak growth. Sweden is expected to be in a recession during 2023. Many people are struggling with high electricity bills and fuel prices, high inflation and high interest rates.

The budget that the four coalition parties have presented prioritizes the most important things, namely supporting households in a difficult situation, strengthening healthcare and increasing the number of care places, and tackling crime with a strengthened justice system and preventive measures while we respond to a tougher geopolitical situation.

We do this without fueling inflation, because it is a real threat to the families' economy and also to the companies'. We also ensure that room for action is created if the downturn in the economy becomes deeper than what we foresee now.

Mr. Speaker! I am concerned when I see the Green Party's culture budget. More money is promised in almost every appropriation item, and these are no small sums. Closer to 3 billion kronor more than the government, the Green Party allocates to expenditures for the culture sector. This indicates that inflation is being fueled. We already have an inflation of just over 9 percent today, compared to normally around 2 percent.

Vänsterpartiet is not far behind, while the Social Democrats have a more moderate level.

What is the situation with the Centre Party? They differ from everyone else by cutting almost every single appropriation in the culture budget. Even handicrafts receive reduced grants. At first, one thinks it is a typo, but then you see that it actually is correct.

Mr. Speaker! The culture budget covers many different cost appropriations, but let me mention one of our initiatives covered by the report which is very close to our Christian Democrats' hearts. It concerns the appropriation for Initiatives for the non-profit sector, where we invest 300 million kronor, of which 75 million per year 2023-2025 for initiatives to counteract involuntary loneliness. The Government is now making a unique initiative in the budget bill in this area - the largest initiative ever to break loneliness and promote community.

Involuntary loneliness is a societal problem with serious consequences. In the company of loneliness, one can suffer from chronic stress that causes the blood vessels to physically contract in a kind of the body's protest against living in conflict with human nature. It leads to more cardiovascular diseases such as infarction and stroke and damages the immune system. Loneliness also increases pain and the risk of depression and dementia. Children living in involuntary loneliness run a greater risk of failing in school.

Mr. Speaker! The reason I am addressing loneliness in my speech is that I believe culture has an important role when it comes to breaking loneliness. Every initiative we take and every krona we allocate to culture grants are therefore extremely important for people's health and well-being.

The only danger lurking around the corner is if we fuel inflation and make it harder for households to survive, so that they consequently cannot afford to participate in culture in various forms. This applies in particular to families living in socioeconomic vulnerability, where we know that even today there is a major deficiency among children and young people when it comes to participating in various cultural activities.

Madam Speaker! In order to safeguard children and young people's access to sports and association life, the government intends to introduce a leisure card. With the leisure card, children and young people shall be given improved opportunities to participate in association and leisure activities.

The Government proposes, as we heard in the exchange of remarks, that 50 million kronor be allocated during 2023 to develop the necessary infrastructure for the introduction of a leisure card for children and young people. During 2024, 730 million kronor are estimated to go towards introducing the leisure card. The same amount applies from 2025 onwards.

Finally, I exclaim as a Christian Democrat. And I have received a lot of feedback here in the chamber from both the Left Party and the Social Democrats when I presented the leisure card. But now I hear that the door is being closed by the Social Democrats, and that makes me very disappointed.

Madam Speaker! We Christian Democrats safeguard popular education and have always stood up for its importance, not least for creating a path into Swedish society. We largely follow the economic plan that the previous government put forward when it comes to the basic grant itself.

I will also say something about a cultural canon. We Christian Democrats have pushed for the issue of a cultural canon and argue that it can, among other things, be a way to create an understanding of Sweden's history. A debater expressed it in the following way: The list would at least give me something to start with, and then I could seek further on my own.

But politicians should not decide what should be included in a cultural canon. That is left to knowledgeable people in the field. I have personally previously suggested that Skolverket should have the primary responsibility in cooperation with the literary and intellectual history institutions at the universities.

Madam Speaker! Finally, I would like to wish my colleagues in the Cultural Committee and our fantastic committee secretariat a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year with Stig Dagerman's words.

The earth you cannot change. Calm your fierce soul! Only one thing you can do: another human being well.

But this is already so much that even the stars are smiling. A hungry human means a brother less.

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

Vasiliki Tsouplaki (V)

Madam Speaker! I requested the floor to have the opportunity to calm Roland Utbult. He sounded so worried that our culture budget is too strong and will create problems in the Swedish economy. I think that it absolutely does not need to be that way, but rather it is a very responsible budget that Vänsterpartiet has presented.

The committee member describes here their commitment regarding loneliness and social exclusion. We have discussed this in many budget debates. Roland Utbult and I stand very close to each other in the analysis that we need to protect the children and young people who are having a tough time and find it difficult to enter association activities, and also protect those people who live in social exclusion for various reasons.

I think it is somewhat problematic with the budget that Roland Utbult's party has backed when one says to stand for these values. It is primarily those who do not have economic resources who risk ending up in isolation and loneliness because they do not have the means to be able to participate in activities, be out and meet people and be part of social contexts.

That is why we in Vänsterpartiet invest in those who have the smallest margins, and we also ensure that we now have a strong culture budget. It is an important part of strengthening the welfare.

I therefore want to ask Roland Utbult why it would be a major problem if we, for example, want to increase the participation compensation for artists who exhibit. They have very low incomes today. And why would it be a problem that we want to invest in school libraries, when Roland Utbult's party in this budget lowers taxes by 13 billion kronor for those who earn over 50,000 kronor a month? They can go directly to private consumption and fuel inflation, which Roland Utbult is worried about. But we have proposals for targeted investments to strengthen culture, for example, to ensure that children in school get to experience performing arts performances twice a year. This will create jobs among cultural workers. Does Roland Utbult mean that it would be better if cultural workers continue to be unemployed because otherwise it risks raising inflation?

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

Roland Utbult (KD)

Madam Speaker! What distinguishes us on the government side and the Left Party is that you have so much more money to work with. In that case, I am very interested to know where you get these coins from. It is about almost 2 billion kronor more than what the government, so to speak, has.

I have a whole list of taxes that you want to increase. What worries me when it comes to families is naturally that this, in my opinion, hits households by fueling inflation - which I perhaps haven't proven, but it is possible - but above all that you add surcharges that are quite difficult for families to bear.

I am therefore not at all convinced in any way that the Left Party's budget would benefit children and young people living in vulnerability. Increased taxes affect, in principle, almost all people. I mean, therefore, that household finances are already very pressured now due to fuel prices, electricity prices, and so on, and that increased taxes would worsen their situation even further.

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

Vasiliki Tsouplaki (V)

Madam Speaker! I thank Roland Utbult for the answer, which I did not quite consider to be the answer to my question, which concerned how the investments we propose would fuel inflation. Now Roland Utbult wants to talk more about how it might be our tax increases that would be a problem. But the tax increases would, in that case, be a way to dampen inflation. I am therefore not quite following the reasoning here.

The reason we have more money in our budget is that, for example, we refrain from lowering the tax for high-income earners. It is about 13 billion kronor that we have the opportunity to ensure are used to strengthen the welfare. We ensure that municipalities and regions receive increased resources so that they can both retain existing staff and make the staff reinforcements that are truly needed.

These 13 billion kronor would really be needed in the budget. Several members from the government parties have previously spoken about how they think it is a crisis and a tough situation. But then see to it that you have resources to meet the problems we face!

When it comes to inflation, it is driven very much by high electricity prices. That is where the effort should be focused, not by going in and cutting the culture budget because one is worried that artists who earn 13,000 kronor a month would live some kind of luxury life and fuel inflation. I think it is a very strange argument being put forward in this debate today.

We have a clear profile in our budget, namely that it is those who earn the most, who have the large margins, who have large fortunes and who are doing very well both today and with higher prices who must be involved and contribute a little more, so that those who are having a hard time and are already living on the margin can get through this crisis.

In the difficult situation we face, we therefore want to ensure that the price increases and problems we see are distributed in a way so that those who are well off can participate and contribute a bit more, and those who are having a really tough time get help through the crisis. We think that is a good policy.

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

Roland Utbult (KD)

Madam Speaker! I thank Vasiliki Tsouplaki for the contribution. We have often found common ground in our view on children and young people living in vulnerability.

I have not said that artists should suffer particularly or anything of the sort; on the contrary, I actually know what it is like to be a musician, to freelance and to try to make the finances work from that reality. It is not an easy reality. I therefore know very well how it feels and how one struggles with such things. I naturally want us to give the artists all opportunities to develop their activities and their finances, and here I believe there is very much to do ahead. Perhaps Vasiliki Tsouplaki and I can find common ground there as well.

I am, however, convinced that we have somewhat different views on reality. In my world, increased taxes are not the right way to go to create more space for people. Instead, it provides less space. When we introduced the job tax credit, people received 1,000 or 1,500 kronor more per month, that is, more to move with. The tax was lowered, so to speak, and people received a subsidy per month instead.

We have different views on taxes, and that is perhaps what actually sets us apart. I have a whole list of taxes you want to raise, Vasiliki Tsouplaki, and it is actually a rather hefty list. We have a different view there, and that means we come to somewhat different conclusions from time to time. So it is.

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

Vasiliki Tsouplaki (V)

Madam Speaker! It is the first time in a long while that we have to take a position on a budget proposal without pandemic support or restart support for culture, sports, and civil society. The Government has concluded that it is no longer needed.

It would be fantastic if it were that way, but unfortunately, there are still activities within the cultural committee's area that are still not back at the levels they had before the pandemic. This applies to both the economic levels as well as the number of participants at practices and the audience at matches or performances. The pandemic also showed what gaps we had in our safety systems and how weak a position many cultural workers had towards their clients.

We therefore cannot go back to the budget or the policy that existed before the pandemic. In the Left Party's budget proposal, some restart funds remain – we are doing a gradual phase-out. We also see that certain compensations to artists need to become permanently higher and that the permanent positions within the performing arts alliances need to increase.

It is obvious that cultural policy needs to secure cultural workers with better conditions so that we do not lose even more to other industries. We must also, as quickly as possible, tell future generations of artists that there is an opportunity to take parental leave, pay the rent, and retire even within the cultural sector. For today's young people to have the strength to invest time and effort, and for them to dare to borrow money for the long educations required to become a truly skilled musician, dancer, or visual artist, clear messages are needed.

Madam Speaker! For us, culture is a part of the welfare. It is not the icing on the cake or just a small extra touch of gold in life, but an important part of our everyday lives and a significant component of the concept of being human. As beings, we are creative, analytical, and expressive. We would have culture in our country even without a culture budget, but the culture would not be as broad, as accessible, or maintain such high quality as it does today. It is this understanding that forms the basis for why, year after year, we invest so that culture can reach more people.

That is why we are providing funds to renovate community centers where associations can meet, where professional performing arts groups perform, or where artists can exhibit. During the pandemic, we saw that many cultural events in smaller localities were organized through the voluntary cultural life. It was a very good model for distributing money, and therefore we are now allocating resources that land very close to people's everyday lives.

A supporting part of our cultural policy is also that all children and young people should experience culture as practitioners, as co-creators, and as an audience. Today, unfortunately, many children can go through their entire schooling without visiting a theater or a museum - this despite it being clear in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, in our national cultural goals, and in the school's steering documents that children have the right to participate in culture and that this should be specifically prioritized.

That is why I mean that a national grip was needed - a cultural lift for the school which means that all students shall have access to a staffed school library, that there shall be high quality in the aesthetic subjects, that all students shall be guaranteed two performing arts performances per year and that every school shall have access to a cultural educator who can be the bridge between the school and cultural life. A clear structure was needed to be able to seriously say that all children in our country receive the cultural experiences they have a right to.

Madam Speaker! Within the area of the Culture Committee, there are also funds for adult education. That activity is also important for us to have culture throughout the country. Study associations exist in all the country's municipalities and offer both cultural programs as well as study circles and courses within a wide range of cultural expressions. The same applies to the folk high schools, which to a large extent are located in smaller towns where they are important meeting places for cultural activities. Many participants are given the opportunity every year to read artistic education and education within crafts and journalism.

The basic idea of popular education, that people should learn together with others, has proven to be both a successful and popular concept over the last hundred years. Our entire democracy is closely linked to the educational activities that have existed within various popular movements from left to right.

Folkbildningen is close to people and can easily base itself on the issues that feel relevant here and now. This was shown, for example, when many people fleeing arrived in Sweden around 2015 and 2016. Then, an organization could be quickly set up to offer the activity Swedish from day one and carry out many meaningful activities at the accommodations. When the next large wave of refugees came from Ukraine, there were already well-tested methods in place to meet these people.

Studieförbunden have also had a fine targeted work towards parents on parental leave and initiatives for those who are far from the labor market.

The government now wants to remove all these measures, without a proper impact assessment. What remains is around 30 million that they have intended should suffice for Svenska from day one for the refugees from Ukraine. It is not enough.

Here one can see that the government parties unfortunately seem to have adopted SD's view on integration. They are happy to talk about how people who come here should learn Swedish, adapt to Swedish values and get a job - but in practice, they make it difficult for them. It is a confession of the lips. Proposal after proposal aims to make it difficult for people with a different background, and then one insinuates - or sometimes says straight out - that the problem lies with immigrants who do not want to learn and do not want to get jobs. People fleeing should not cost us anything; that is very clear. Possibly empathy can extend to people from Ukraine - to them one can imagine directing aid and a few study hours in Swedish.

Madam Speaker! Let me also say something about important efforts within the second branch of folk education, namely the folk high schools and what they stand for.

The breadth of courses that the country's 155 folk high schools offer creates great value for everyone who get the chance to participate. Many participants state that the education has increased their chances of getting a job, even though it is not a goal in itself from the state's side that they should do so. There are also many who have been able to continue their studies in higher education after completing folk high school.

In a survey of the movement-driven folk high schools, as many as 94 percent of those interviewed stated that the studies had had a positive impact on their personal development. Those are very fine figures. It is clear that the pedagogy based on the participants' own needs and circumstances is a very successful recipe that should be offered to more, especially in times of high unemployment.

Now the government chooses to do exactly the opposite. They want to remove the extra positions that were created during the pandemic, despite everyone in here knowing that there is a great risk of higher unemployment in the coming year. Many are, for example, the municipalities and regions that will have to cut staff when the government does not inject enough money to secure welfare. We also hear about concern from many companies that cannot cope with the high electricity prices and need to shut down their production while waiting for news from the government on when support can be expected.

Madam Speaker! The unemployed who have been given the opportunity to be referred by Arbetsförmedlingen to a folk high school have, to a large extent, been able to move on to further studies or jobs. That is how it has been for a long time.

But in recent years, something has happened. Arbetsförmedlingen has not worked in the same way with referring participants. It is said that this has to do with the recent chaos privatization reform, as we usually call it, which the previous government unfortunately agreed upon with the Liberals and the Center Party. Offices were closed, and there were major problems when the staff did not have the opportunity to work so actively with the unemployed. There was no administrative IT support or sufficient knowledge of the new regulations for the private contractors. There were many who did not get the chance to attend folk high schools that they had needed.

In the Left Party's budget, the extra training places remain. We are also increasing the compensation per training place because the grant has been eroded over time. Furthermore, the participants have a greater need for special support than before, so this is very important.

We in Vänsterpartiet have so many initiatives in our budget. I will move on to the part concerning sports and outdoor life, which is an important part of the culture budget.

There is a shortage of space in many places in the country. Investments are needed so that the municipalities have the opportunity to build new halls, and Vänsterpartiet has an investment support for this.

We believe that investments are also needed so that more people with disabilities can enter sports life, so we want to see specific investments in para-sports and the accessibility of premises. We also want to review the transport service and the regulations for these parts, so that more people can participate.

I would like to conclude by addressing the issue of high fees, which we have touched upon. This applies to both sports and the cultural school. Very many children are left out. It is clear that Vänsterpartiet has funds in its budget: 300 million to the municipalities to lower the fees in the cultural school.

I want to say something positive here at the end following the exchange with Roland Utbult earlier. I think it is a small light in the dark that a leisure card might be on its way. It might enable more people to participate in association life in the future. It is a small glimmer of light in an otherwise rather dark time.

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

Roland Utbult (KD)

Madam Speaker! I reacted to something that Member Vasiliki Tsouplaki said. It was about the fact that we are cutting back so significantly on popular education.

First, I want to say that we safeguard popular education. We see the value of it when it concerns people with low education who have the opportunity to catch up and get a new start. It is about people with poor language skills who get the opportunity to learn a language. It is about a way into society. It is about integration work and about a second chance for very many, which I like very much.

What I hear about us cutting back does not match the facts. We safeguard the basic funding that exists and that existed before the pandemic. We simply follow the plan that the previous government has laid out. Much like with the reasoning regarding the culture school earlier, it can easily be the case that people listening to this believe that we are cutting back very much. We cleared that up before.

When it comes to popular education, we follow the plan that the previous government has put forward. This is what applies to us.

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

Vasiliki Tsouplaki (V)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Roland Utbult, for the opportunity to reply!

Things change. If a plan was presented three years ago regarding how long a grant should exist, one must be able to reconsider the plan. When we see that there is still a need for measures such as Svenska från dag ett and that there are still many asylum seekers who do not get the chance to study SFI, we must reconsider and reflect on what is required for people to get the chance to learn Swedish and obtain meaningful activity. One could, for example, imagine a higher level of ambition as a political initiative.

That is how we in Vänsterpartiet see it. This needs to be considered politically. What does the operation look like today, and what is required for it to be able to become even better?

I think I was clear that what is being removed are the extra pandemic places. Vänsterpartiet says that they are still needed. Unemployment is high, and extra places at the folk high schools are needed. We also see that there are many asylum seekers who need Swedish from day one. There are many on parental leave and people who are far from the labor market who need these interventions from the study associations, which have received targeted funds for a number of years.

It is about 600 million that you are cutting, Roland Utbult. Even if you call it safeguarding popular education, it is 600 million less in operational funds that have nonetheless existed. Then one must decide politically: Is this activity that should continue, or do you think it is good if it ceases? We from Vänsterpartiet think that it should be allowed to continue.

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

Roland Utbult (KD)

Madam Speaker! As several speakers have expressed earlier, it is a matter of priorities. We are investing very much in welfare, healthcare, and more care beds. We are investing in combating crime and so on. We have a large number of reforms that we prioritize. They concern mental health, homelessness, loneliness, which I touched upon, sports initiatives in vulnerable areas and so on.

The 500 or 600 million that was involved during the pandemic expired in 2022. We are following the previous government's strategy in this area.

We have kept Svenska from day one. It was an idea from - I believe - the Social Democrats and the left. It remains with 30 million, and I believe it is an important part that one should not have to wait for SFI but can get quick help with the language. This we support.

Once again: The cuts that there was concern about did not come. With these words, I want to reassure Vasiliki Tsouplaki.

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

Vasiliki Tsouplaki (V)

Madam Speaker! It is true that many had feared much larger cuts; that is indeed the case. Roland Utbult may feel that this has been safeguarded, but it is still 600 million less. I agree that it could have been worse, for example, considering how the Sweden Democrats' budget has looked previously, but I do not quite think that what Roland Utbult says about that instead of doing this, one has invested heavily in healthcare and welfare, is correct.

SKR, Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner, has said that they need it just to maintain the same level and not have to cut every 20 billion. Not even that you can scrape together, Roland Utbult, but there will be major cuts in municipalities and regions. Then, as we heard in the previous exchange of remarks, many of the voluntary activities will probably have to be scrapped. The culture school could be such an example. I am, therefore, concerned.

If it is in line with what previous governments have thought, that has nothing to do with what is on the table now. This is your government's proposal. You all have every opportunity to look out and reflect on what you want and what reality looks like. You can reflect on which investments are needed to secure welfare, to strengthen culture, and to ensure that we have good folk education and opportunities for people to participate in education in Swedish, for example when one is an asylum seeker.

Roland Utbult says that money remains for Svenska from day one. It is true that 30 million remains. But studieförbunden says that it is not enough. That has worried us. That is why we have put in money. We have looked at the budget messages and the volumes that have been counted on. It is difficult to know how many will come from Ukraine. But it is better to be slightly on the upper side than to cut back without doing consequence analyses. That is what I would have liked to hear or see today.

How has it been planned to work? What are the calculations made for? Unfortunately, it feels like wishful thinking.

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

Madam Speaker! It is on the grounds of the Left Party's opening statement that I request the floor. It is suggested that the government's and the Sweden Democrats' policies would be bad for refugees and for integration. That raises the question: How has integration fared with the red-greens' policy, more specifically cultural policy? From everything to judge, it has not gone particularly well. If one means the opposite, it would be interesting to hear what evidence there is for that, figures or anything at all. That is the first question.

Another question is how much money it is reasonable to spend on immigration out of the culture budget. What has been pointed out here is probably an artifact of precisely the failed policy that we have seen and part of what has led to the failure of integration. It is also an important reason why the Swedish people have actually wanted to change the government.

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

Vasiliki Tsouplaki (V)

Madam Speaker! What I pointed out in my speech was precisely that the Sweden Democrats have had no ambition to have an integration policy but have always talked about assimilation. All integration efforts have always been struck from the budget at the municipal level, at the regional level, and at the national level. I now see that the governing parties have adopted this in your cooperation, Leonid Yurkovskiy. I do not perceive that this has been something that the Sweden Democrats have bargained for. It has been your own characteristic, your direction that we should not have an integration policy but an assimilation policy.

When you look at how society looks, it is through your glasses and from your values. My party stands for completely different values. We think that people who come here should receive a welcome that is stable, good and safe, and where we offer good language initiatives, trained teachers and engaged people who show up and welcome people.

The policy that the government has now established through the Tidö Agreement together with the Sweden Democrats is a policy that aims to make it more difficult for people fleeing who have come to Sweden and seek protection here. They want to deter people from coming to Sweden. It has been an explicit reduction in ambition. They want to worsen the safety systems and worsen the reception so that people do not think it is attractive to come to Sweden but instead seek other places.

So the debate has been for a long time. The stated ambition is that people should not come here. Therefore, it must not be too attractive to be a refugee and an immigrant in Sweden. I think it is a very clear ambition from the Sverigedemokraterna, which the other bourgeois parties have now unfortunately been brought along on.

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

Leonid Yurkovskiy (SD)

Madam Speaker! It is not true that we actively want to create difficulties. It is true, however, that we have identified failed integration measures and are now working to clean them up. It is also true that we are cleaning up and getting the cultural policy in order.

The question remains: What in the red-greens' and specifically the Left Party's culture policy has demonstrably worked? Which means have led to results? It is still a large question mark hanging in the air.

I want to know how much money it is reasonable to spend on integration measures that have demonstrably not worked. A follow-up question could be what new measures the Left Party can imagine.

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

Vasiliki Tsouplaki (V)

Madam Speaker! If I am to be a bit concrete regarding what falls within the scope of the Culture Committee, it is, for example, the courses that exist within folk education and the initiatives that the study associations have been responsible for. They have yielded good results. People have requested even more progression. One could, for example, invest even more in Swedish from day one to get more hours. This has been requested precisely because it has been seen that it has yielded much. Those initiatives have been valuable.

It also concerns the measures that I described that Arbetsförmedlingen has been responsible for in terms of referring people who are far from the labor market to courses to receive an introduction to studies and work. These are motivation-boosting measures for those who have been unemployed for a long time. They have been successful measures with good results. They have been evaluated, and we and other parties propose that they should continue. Arbetsförmedlingen has also considered the collaborations with the folkhögskolor to have been successful. There are many good examples.

We are critical that more refugees from Ukraine cannot be given, for example, SFI instead. It is an established form of education where there is a curriculum and another structure. There, one could invest even more, if one wants people to learn Swedish quickly and enter Swedish society.

The entire privatization wave and the marketization of SFI and adult education has meant that schools have lied about having qualified teachers in order to be able to submit bids. Such actions lower the quality of Swedish language teaching. We hear criticism in many places in the country, for example where we are members of the municipal council, where such things have occurred. We monitor closely that people receive the correct support to learn the language.

There should be no discrimination in the labor market. We need to be aware that it is happening today. People who have a long education come to Sweden, apply for 70 or 100 engineering jobs and have the right education but do not even get to come for an interview.

There is much to be done so that people can enter our society. SD's policy is unfortunately not the way forward.

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

Robert Hannah (L)

Madam Speaker! Nika Shakarami was 16 years old. I want you to remember her name. She is one of many young people whom the Islamist dictatorship in Iran has murdered since the revolution began. On September 20, she disappeared. In her last call, she phoned a friend and said that the morality police were pursuing her. Then her mobile was turned off. For ten days, her family searched frantically for her. Finally, the authorities asked the family to identify a dead body. It was Nika. She had a crushed ribcage and had been raped. Her internal organs had been stolen from her body. She had simply been murdered. This is just one of very many examples of crimes against humanity that the Iranian dictatorship is currently committing against its own people.

The demonstrations in Iran are the youth's reckoning with the political Islam that has for decades governed the country's culture and people. Nika was beaten, and Iran's youth are still fighting for freedoms that most ethnic Swedes here take for granted. It is about the right to dance, the right to sing, the right to play sports, the right to gather in associations, the right to express their opinions, the right to blaspheme, and the right to criticize their political leaders.

Madam Speaker! Even in Sweden today, above all, girls and boys are being deprived of the right to live and shape themselves and participate in Swedish culture as they wish. I grew up in one of Gothenburg's suburbs where young girls were forced to wear a veil, were not allowed to participate in sports, were not allowed to date, and were not allowed to curse. These Swedish children's entire lives were surrounded by prohibitions.

Madam Speaker! Sweden shall be a democratic role model for the rest of the world. In that case, it is our mission not only to safeguard the free culture in Sweden but also to ensure that our freedoms also encompass Swedes with a foreign background. It is only then that Sweden is a role model for Iran's freedom fighters.

In Sweden, culture shall be free. An arm's length distance shall apply to politicians. Public service shall be independent, and the freedom of the media shall be protected. But the new bourgeois government will not only defend the freedom of culture but also ensure that it encompasses everyone in our country, in our Sweden.

It is primarily about two principles that I believe we need to add to the area of cultural policy. In any case, we need to ensure that it becomes a reality.

The first principle is that not a single tax crown shall go to extremism. That radical Islamism has gained a foothold in Sweden is not due to immigration. For example, Swedes with Iranian roots and Iranian background are proof of this. They are very successful here. Radical Islamism has grown due to a cowardice to combat separatism. It has been due to a lack of insight that our freedom is built on the existence of common fundamental democratic values, such as equality between the sexes, a common legislation that we all follow, not honor laws, and a common language that we can all speak with each other, which for us is the Swedish language. Swedish authorities, in my opinion, are practicing self-censorship today when it comes to Islamism in a way that one does not do when it comes to communism's and Nazism's crimes against humanity. I will personally fight for a change of this.

This Islamist separatism has also begun to organize itself by taking part of the taxpayers' support for association life. Swedish tax money that should have gone to folk education, homework help, and cultural projects has instead gone to Quran schools and extreme homophobic speakers and been funneled further to violence-promoting organizations around the world. It is totally unacceptable.

The Liberals are proud that the government during this mandate period will reform the funds allocated to popular education and strengthen the democratic requirements for economic grants. I know that we have taken back the legislation that existed. It will return in an even stronger version. In the future, not a single tax crown shall go to fraudsters, jokers, or extremists.

The second principle is that all children growing up in Sweden must be given access to Swedish culture and the Swedish language. Many within the cultural world have expressed themselves strongly negatively towards a cultural canon since the proposal was presented in the Tidö Agreement. It is easy to mock a cultural canon when one belongs to the cultural elite. But instead, I mean, Madam Speaker, that it reveals some form of stinginess. The cultural elite possesses a massive cultural capital which they, with self-evidence, convey to their own children, who thereby gain a head start in being able to successfully navigate Swedish society. Why deny the youth in the suburbs the power of culture, Madam Speaker? That is my question.

I grew up in Tynnered in Gothenburg with parents who came to Sweden as refugees. They did not have the same opportunities to put me in a cultural school, as we have debated today. I hardly knew what it was before I became a politician. I attended one of very many rowdy municipal schools. They have many unauthorized teachers who have not studied literary studies and therefore do not have the tools to give their students the same life chances as schools in Villa- and row house Sweden.

Marginalization in Sweden is not just about economy and jobs. That is why I have now entered the area of the Cultural Committee. It is also about an emotional and cultural marginalization that we must address. Far too many young people with a foreign background do not feel like Swedes. They do not experience themselves as being part of the nation-building here. They also do not get the same access to our most important texts.

It was a great failure that, historically, the reading lists that existed here in Sweden in the schools were removed. Both a cultural canon and specific reading lists for all schools in Sweden were needed, which is also, pleasingly, a part of the Tidö Agreement. It will ensure that children in all of Gothenburg's suburbs begin to read the same books that the cultural elite naturally let their children read.

Madam Speaker! It is actually the case that Swedish culture is not primarily financed by taxpayers but through voluntary forces, entrepreneurs, and private individuals who pay for cultural, sports, or leisure activities. That being said, the budget we are now debating, excluding the corona budgets, is the largest that a Swedish government has presented for the cultural area. It is impressive considering the recession we are heading into and Russia's invasion of Ukraine. We Liberals are particularly proud of the investment in sports in vulnerable areas, the leisure cards that will now become a reality, Swedish from day one for Ukrainian refugees, and the longer scholarships for cultural workers.

The Liberals move for approval of the new bourgeois government's and the Sweden Democrats' budget proposal within expenditure area 17 Culture, media, religious communities and leisure.

In conclusion, I want to say: Jin, jiyan, azadi! Woman, life, freedom! Sweden shall be an example.

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

Catarina Deremar (C)

Madam Speaker! Culture, media, sports and civil society need to be available for everyone in the entire country. All these areas are of great importance for taking advantage of and securing the opportunities for a strong democratic society. The state naturally needs to be involved and contribute to creating good conditions.

Encountering culture in different forms, both professionally presented culture and the creations of amateurs, is enriching in many ways. It awakens our curiosity to learn more and gain new perspectives. Everyone, regardless of place of residence, background, disability, and life situation, shall have the opportunity to participate in a cultural life. Culture strengthens self-confidence and ensures that more people take advantage of freedom of expression. This, in turn, strengthens participation and democracy in our society.

To lift cultural life in the whole country, the Center Party wants to strengthen and develop the cultural cooperation model with the aim that the regions shall have a greater influence. Therefore, the regions' cultural plans are important.

Madam Speaker! In 1985, the initiative to designate European Capitals of Culture was developed, partly to highlight the richness and diversity of cultures in Europe, to increase EU citizens' sense of belonging to a common cultural area, and to promote culture's contribution to the development of cities.

We could also do this nationally. We could strengthen cultural life throughout the country by establishing a system for a national capital of culture year, where a new Swedish city every other year would be granted the status of national capital of culture. Then smaller cities can also receive attention and a chance to showcase and especially develop their cultural life. It has been shown that in the European capitals of culture, the image of the cities has been improved in the eyes of their own inhabitants. The city's culture has received new life, and increased tourism has been achieved.

Culture can also be an important part of integration for those who come new to our country. Here I would like to highlight popular education, as some previous speakers have done. I want to highlight the activities and work of the study associations and the folk high schools. The study associations already have the infrastructure ready. It exists in every village, if we so wish. The study associations have meant incredibly much for Swedish from day one.

Our folk high schools number 155, we have learned today. They are well distributed across the entire country. There, participants from diverse backgrounds meet. If one has ever visited a folk high school, one cannot miss what this unique form of education means for the participants. One of the goals for the folk high school is to level educational inequalities and raise the level of education in society. For many people who need a new start or restart, to take the next step in life and in the educational ladder or approach the labor market, the folk high schools will continue to be important.

We are in the midst of a skills shortage in many different professions. As a country, we should turn over every stone to get people to find their way to more education or to the right education. The country's folk high schools play an important role here.

It is unfortunate that the government is lowering the funding for the folk high schools during the next year. I would like to see more money for folk education specifically.

Madam Speaker! Finally: Cultural freedom is our freedom. It is about democracy and dialogue in society. That we as politicians maintain at least an arm's length distance from cultural content is something we must constantly guard today and every day forward.

With that, I wish to stand behind our specific statement from Centerpartiet.

(cont. § 14)

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