Student financial aid

Fredrik Malm (L)

Madam Speaker! We now have to debate the Education Committee's report on student financial aid. I would like to begin by moving to approve the proposal in the report.

Sweden is and shall remain a knowledge nation that contributes innovations of world-class and secures our future prosperity through inventions in areas such as medicine, economy, industry, welfare and much more. A well-educated population is one of Sweden's strongest assets for our competitiveness and our ability to maintain our welfare state.

Mr. Speaker, along the horizon there are worrying trends regarding the level of education in society. The Pisa survey from last year points to an extensive literacy crisis among Swedish eighth graders. There are, however, it should be said, glimmers of light in the results from other surveys that point to improvements in any case regarding mathematics and also adults' abilities. On the other hand, differences between groups persist, and parents' level of education continues to have a great impact on children's life chances.

Madam Speaker! Our future shall not be determined by how many shelf meters of books one has at home, but by one's own ability and one's own drive. In this regard, the student grant is completely central to guaranteeing equal opportunities for everyone to receive an education in Sweden.

This is something that my party wholeheartedly stands behind. It is an important institution of freedom in the sense that all individuals in Sweden are given the opportunity to realize themselves. We make no distinction between rich and poor, and we shall have a system for higher education that can promote talented individuals regardless of background, gender, place of residence, and status.

I would say that today's student support system works well, Madam Speaker, and it is my firm intention that the main features of the student support system shall remain unchanged. The support shall be recruiting for women and men, regardless of background, for young as well as older people, and for the unemployed as well as the employed, and regardless of educational background, gender, and origin. It shall furthermore be long-term sustainable, and the principle is that the student loan shall be repaid in full.

We shall continue to have a generous education system - one of the most generous in the world, it should be added. It enables life journeys, and it is good for democracy. In a turbulent world and in a sea of disinformation and influence operations, a democracy is only as strong as the resilience of its population. Here, the level of education is almost a hygiene factor in order to be able to withstand conspiracy theories and contempt for democracy and everything else that can undermine our democracy and freedom.

We want a society, Madam Speaker, characterized by tolerance, humanism and enlightenment. That requires a well-educated population and a well-functioning school system.

Here, the government is making major investments throughout the entire education chain. We are shifting from screens to binders and investing heavily in real textbooks and literary works in schools to counter the reading crisis and the falling results in reading comprehension.

I am deeply concerned, Madam Speaker, by the testimonies coming from educational institutions that students, even at some of the country's top schools, do not have sufficient ability to understand longer texts. It is clear that the school must return to the basics in order to equip our students for the future. What happens in school affects our educational institutions and higher education and, in the long run, the entire society.

Madam Speaker! For the supply of skills and economic growth, an open and generous student support system is absolutely crucial. Since January last year, there has been a new transition student support to improve the conditions for adults to finance studies that can strengthen their future position on the labor market. It is about securing the skills that are needed in a rapidly changing economy.

The interest in this support has been very great, and that is very good. The interest has been significantly greater than was estimated it would be. The system is to be fully developed by 2026, and according to what this House decides when we allocate resources in the budget, it will amount to a bit over 7 billion kronor.

Many will now have the opportunity to retrain and further their education, and persons who are granted this support will be able to receive up to 80 percent of their salary up to a certain level in order to be able to retrain for at most 44 weeks.

The transition study support is a new reform. It is the result of the agreement that unions and employers entered into a few years ago. But when it is a new system and a new reform, there is always a risk that everything will not be perfect from the start, and we saw that clearly. Processing times skyrocketed - many are still waiting for a decision.

It is this government's ambition to increase the processing rate. We made changes in April this year, and we recently adopted the bill A more efficient transition study support to simplify the regulations and increase the processing rate for the transition study support. In the budget for next year, the Central Swedish National Student Aid Board, CSN, also receives an additional 50 million kronor in its administrative grant to manage this large volume of cases. It is very important that this processing also becomes more efficient as the support is now being expanded and more and more people enter the transition study support system.

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for the speech, Fredrik Malm! I intended to speak about and ask questions about something that the member did not mention at all in his speech.

The student support system also includes the study grant for upper secondary school students, which is extremely important for all families with children across our country. It is actually the case that this grant has not been increased since 2018, when it was raised from 1,050 kronor to today's level of 1,250 kronor.

This is something that we Social Democrats prioritize in this year's budget proposal. We are giving an additional 200 kronor to families with children who are studying at the upper secondary level. This, together with the fact that we Social Democrats are also raising the child allowance by 200 kronor per month, would mean that families in our country who have two children at home who are studying could receive nearly 5,000 kronor more in their pockets every year.

The government and the Liberals, to which Fredrik Malm belongs, choose to prioritize high-income earners instead of prioritizing families with children within the student grants for upper secondary school students. I want to ask Member Malm why the Liberals prioritize high-income earners over Sweden's families with children.

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Madam Speaker! To begin with, it can be mentioned that these supports are general, which means that they also go to high-income earners. I myself, for example, would be a big winner on the proposals the Social Democrats are putting forward. It therefore gives no direct redistributive policy profile to increase these supports. They go just as much to millionaires as to people with lower incomes.

Madam Speaker! Everything is a whole when we set a budget. We heard, for example, in the previous debate how the Social Democrats want to cut over 40 billion on road maintenance in Sweden. There are always different priorities that we make.

We consider the government's proposals to be well-balanced when it comes to student support, student grants, the distribution between loans and grants, and what is studied within higher education and also at the upper secondary level. In the budget, we choose to prioritize those young people who are studying apprenticeship programs, because we see a particular need for increased support to make those programs more attractive. Students who study them may, for example, have a longer commute to school and thus other costs for travel and so on. There, we therefore make an increase.

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! I would first like to point out that we Social Democrats stand behind the government's expenditure area 15. The increase in apprentice compensation is also included in our budget. We choose instead, in our proposal regarding the total budget, to prioritize families with children and upper secondary school students by ensuring that there is money to enable an increase of 200 kronor per month for upper secondary school students.

Last week I visited some high school classes. When we talked about what they want from politics, it was quite natural that they said they would like to have more money, but they were also very good at giving examples of what they would use the extra money for.

Unlike ministers and other high-income earners who have difficulty saying what they will do with the additional thousands they receive every month, the high school students could say that they would spend it on participating in various activities connected to school that their classmates can afford but which many people have to choose to opt out of today. Many who do not have strong finances at home might ensure that over a three-year period they could buy a pair of new shoes to wear so that they do not want to feel left out.

For me and us Social Democrats, it matters very much that one can be part of the inclusive classroom climate regardless of where one lives and where one attends school in our country. Therefore, it is obvious for us to prioritize families with children and upper secondary school students higher than those who earn hundreds of thousands of kronor a month. Fredrik Malm is welcome to continue explaining how the Liberals can take a stand for high-income earners rather than upper secondary school students.

(Applause)

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

Fredrik Malm (L)

Madam Speaker! I believe, of course, that even a 16- or 17-year-old in Sweden whose parents receive 1,250 kronor a month can be part of an inclusive classroom climate. But with an extra hundred kronor or two, according to the Social Democrats' prioritization, perhaps the person becomes even more included in the classroom climate. I do not know if that is exactly where the shoe pinches, if I am to be honest. There are probably other factors that determine whether students are included in a classroom climate.

If one were to weigh the Social Democrats' budget priorities at the national level against their tax increases in, for example, my constituency, Region Stockholm, and the City of Stockholm, I do not think they would fare well among families with children and people with slightly lower incomes. Furthermore, various fee increases and other things are being implemented.

Madam Speaker! Overall, we have a well-balanced budget. This means that we can make a number of tax cuts, which is important, and that we can make large investments in welfare, which is also important. We are making long-term investments in the infrastructure of society. With the new research bill, we are making large investments in higher education, excellence, and so on. We are making a number of different initiatives to build a stronger Sweden. We look forward to Sweden also becoming stronger from this.

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Initially, I would like to move for approval of the opposition's joint reservation regarding the changed objective for the expenditure area. I also want to draw the audience's attention to the Social Democrats' specific statement on how we would have distributed the expenditures in a different framework decision.

Madam Speaker! Education is the foundation for a just and successful society. For us Social Democrats, access to knowledge is a right, not a privilege. It is a promise of equality that means every individual, regardless of background, has the opportunity to shape their future. It is against that background that a well-developed and general student support system is crucial. It is about us as a society enabling lifelong learning and development. Unfortunately, the government chooses to go in another direction.

The government is taking steps, step by step, to dismantle the consensus and the stable foundation of student financial aid, budget by budget. It is about the abolition of the equalization goal, the cuts to the higher grant, the scrapping of the student start support, and the announcement that they want to review the entire student financial aid system, without any hint of long-term agreements. It is nothing less than regrettable. There has been a long tradition of reaching agreements across party lines on important systems to create stable political conditions.

Long-term perspective is of utmost importance for all those individuals who are considering further studies and investing in themselves. They need stable conditions so that they know what applies in the future. Therefore, we Social Democrats believe that the changes the government has signaled should have a parliamentary group attached to them so that it does not become the same sudden reversal as in the issue of changing the goal for the entire expenditure area.

Madam Speaker! We live in a time of economic uncertainty. The cost-of-living crisis has hit Swedish households hard, especially the families with children who are struggling to make ends meet. Food prices have risen, the Christmas table risks becoming record-expensive, electricity bills are skyrocketing, and rents continue to increase. In this situation, political priorities are required that meet people's reality and provide hope for the future. Political leadership is required that looks out for the many, not a few.

Despite the crisis, the government chooses to turn a blind eye to the economic pressure that many young people and their families experience. The government has chosen to give high-income earners thousands more per month instead of securing the finances for families with children.

Instead of everyone with monthly salaries in the hundreds of thousands of kronor receiving large tax cuts, we Social Democrats believe the money should go to families with children. Therefore, in our budget, we prioritize an increase of 200 kronor per month of both the child allowance and the study grant for upper secondary school students. This would mean nearly 5,000 kronor more per year for a family with two children in school. It is about fairness and that families with children should not be left behind when the economy is tough.

Madam Speaker! In line with the government removing the goal last year that the student support system should act leveling, they now choose to proceed with large cuts to the higher grant level and completely abolish the student start support from 2026. In times of sky-high unemployment and a need for education and labor market training, it is astonishing that the government seems to completely lack the ambition that more, especially individuals far from the labor market, should be able to make themselves employable. Instead, the government is phasing out rather than evaluating and developing the student start support, which has the task of enabling individuals who have a short educational background or are far from a high school education to educate themselves.

We Social Democrats propose instead that the target group for the study start support be changed so that more can participate, while at the same time authorities must be tasked to work more systematically to get more people who are outside the labor market to educate themselves with the help of the support.

This is about taking responsibility and ensuring that the unemployment existing in society is combated. If we are to get more people into work, large investments in education and student support are required, not a total lack of labor market policy and the abolition of studiestartstöd.

In conclusion, we cannot avoid devoting a part of this debate to the transition study support – the support that was introduced with a first application round in 2022 and where they still cannot deliver decisions to everyone who has applied for the support before their education begins.

It is welcome that the government has finally realized that CSN needs more money to manage the processing of all the applications that come in from everyone who wants to study and transition their skills in the middle of life. It is, however, regrettable that it has taken the government so long to reach that realization.

Unfortunately, this has damaged the reputation of the transition study support, and it will take time before this reputation manages to achieve a positive tone. In that regard, the state, together with the labor market partners, has an incredibly large task ahead of them so that more people will gain confidence in the support and so that more people will become aware of the support, in order to meet all the major societal challenges we have ahead of us.

The transition study support, just like other parts of the student support, has an incredibly important role to play for society. It contributes to a just and successful society, a society where access to education and knowledge is not a privilege but a right. It contributes to ensuring that all individuals in our society, regardless of background, have the opportunity to shape their own future.

(Applause)

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! Member Sigvardsson stated both in the statement we have just received and in the exchange with the committee chair that the Social Democrats propose an increased student grant for upper secondary school students.

Member Sigvardsson also told that he had met students from upper secondary school and that, when asked what they want from politics, he received the description that it was increased student grants. I got the impression that Member Sigvardsson and thus the Social Democrats perhaps had promised that with the Social Democrats it would be increased student grants for upper secondary students.

In the proposal that the Socialdemokraterna have submitted to the Swedish Riksdag, they do not, however, add more funds to the student grant for upper secondary school. The expansion that Member Sigvardsson advocates for concerns the student grant for university students, budget item 1:2 Studiemedel. It is budget item 1:1 Studiehjälp that refers to upper secondary school, but there are no more funds from Socialdemokraterna there.

Would Niklas Sigvardsson like to explain what he means?

(Applause)

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Member Rosengren, for the question!

We Social Democrats clearly stand up for families with children in the budget that we have placed before the Riksdag and which we would like to see passed. It is about 200 kronor more for the child allowance for children who are younger than high school students, and it is about 200 kronor more for those high school students who have a study grant during their high school education.

It is a clear prioritization that we Social Democrats make when we weigh budget options against budget options. We Social Democrats will always stand up for families with children against the large tax cuts that the Moderates, to which Oliver Rosengren belongs, place on the Riksdag's table.

It is not high-income earners with hundreds of thousands of kronor a month who should have the large tax cuts and the large inflation protection of their economy, but it is the families with children. This is what we Social Democrats stand for.

(Applause)

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Madam Speaker! I would like to recommend that Member Sigvardsson, together with his colleagues from the Social Democrats, take part of his own budget proposal and also read the description that exists of the various appropriation items.

Under heading 2:4, one can read the description of Studiehjälp, which is the appropriation item for study grants for upper secondary school students. There, the Social Democrats have not proposed a higher appropriation than the government. They have, however, as Member Sigvardsson very rightly says, done so when it comes to the appropriation item Studiemedel, which concerns university students.

It is worrying if the Social Democrats meet high school classes and families with children and promise them 200 kronor more in their wallets for every child attending high school. There is no coverage for that in the budget that you have voted for and that you represent, Niklas Sigvardsson.

Madam Speaker! It is not the case that the budget alternative that the Social Democrats have presented to the chamber of the Riksdag contains any 200 kronor more for upper secondary school students, for in appropriation item 1:1 there are no more funds than there are in the government's proposal for decision.

(Applause)

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the reading tip, as I interpret Oliver Rosengren's contribution as a tip on how I should read a committee report.

We Social Democrats will stand firm in that we secure the finances of families with children in the budget alternative that we lay before the Riksdag. There is nothing else.

If you place the budget proposals side by side, you will see clearly that there is money for the child allowance and that there is money so that upper secondary school students can receive 200 kronor more per month, contrasted with the massive tax cuts that high-income earners receive in the budget proposal that Oliver Rosengren will plead for here later.

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

Anders Alftberg (SD)

Madam Speaker! I would first like to take the opportunity to move for approval of the Education Committee's proposal in report UbU2 Expenditure Area 15 Student Support.

We all know that knowledge and education are the primary tools for achieving success, both for the individual and for society as a whole. Sweden today has one of the world's most generous student grant systems, and we shall, of course, continue to have that.

It gives the gifted and talented girl or boy the opportunity to study regardless of social background. It gives the single parent an extra opportunity to make a career change in the middle of life.

As has been said many times before, we have every reason to feel proud of our student grant system. But, Madam Speaker, just as the sun has its spots, the student grant system also has its spots. One of these is the so-called study start support. This support was introduced in 2017 by the previous government with the pretext that it would help people who are far away from the labor market.

From the start, we in Sverigedemokraterna have opposed this grant. The study start support cannot be interpreted as anything other than being intended for newly arrived persons. Approximately 70 percent of those studying with this support have been foreign citizens.

The purpose of the initiative has created injustice between groups, where those other than newcomers are referred to financing their studies with student loans. The study start support as a form of grant has meant that newcomers have been able to avoid taking student loans for a period. The support has also resulted in an unequal distortion in study financing.

Madam Speaker! It is therefore pleasing that the study start support is being phased out from 2026. The appropriation is reduced by 100 million kronor in the coming year. From and including 2026, the appropriation is estimated to decrease by 400 million kronor.

The Government and the Sweden Democrats will return to the Riksdag with a bill regarding the phasing out of the study start support. We Sweden Democrats see this as a great success and victory.

Madam Speaker! To re-establish a safe, secure and free Sweden is the Tidö parties' priority goal. In addition to us giving the justice system 3.5 new billion in the budget for next year, we are now making it more attractive to train to become a police officer. We Tidö parties intend to submit a proposal which means that those who study at the police training in autumn 2024 or later will have their student loans repaid or waived.

We Sweden Democrats went to the election on the promise that Sweden would return to a paid police training, as it was until 1998. This is a step in the right direction. We hope that the investment will lead to more people, even people in the middle of their lives, choosing to change careers and become police officers.

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I wish everyone here in the chamber and all the hard-working officials in the administration and other activities a Merry Christmas.

(Applause)

(FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER: I promise to convey the greeting to the Speaker as well.)

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! I want to dwell on the great mess that Member Alftberg had regarding the study start grant. I remember a budget debate two years ago concerning the budget for 2023. It was pleasing to see that the Sweden Democrats had then actually moved away from their principle of not lowering the study start grant, which was what the budget included then. The Member said then that this is a good support that is needed.

Now, instead, we see a reduction in appropriations of 100 million for the coming years and then a complete abolition of the support, which means 400 million in total. These are funds used so that people who are far away from the labor market shall have the opportunity to enter employment. That is what this support is about. It is about people with a short educational background who are very far away from the labor market having the opportunity to take steps toward education in order to then be able to take a job.

It is very clear that the Sweden Democrats do not consider that these people should be able to educate themselves to then be able to get a job, become self-sufficient, and thus be able to contribute to society throughout their entire lives. The Sweden Democrats are welcome to continue explaining why support that is intended to ensure that people get work and can support themselves simply should be scrapped, and how those people in that case should be able to get jobs in the future.

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

Anders Alftberg (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the question.

We cannot turn a blind eye to what the National Audit Office said when it conducted its review. It was a rather substantial critique. It was concluded that this grant does not lead to the things that are requested. That is clearly the case.

We are now making a reorganization, just as we have done with the transition study support. Some of these things are overlapping, and in those cases, we would rather allocate more resources and more focus to the other types of support – for example, the transition study support, which requires a lot of work to function. It is much better to phase out, for example, the controversial, even by the National Audit Office, study start support, which in my opinion is fundamentally discriminatory.

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! A support that is fundamentally discriminatory, the Sweden Democrats say via Alftberg. It is a support that can be changed - absolutely! We Social Democrats are always open to evaluating and developing the supports that exist so that they achieve the greatest effect, so that people who are far from the labor market through study start support or other supports within the student support system get the opportunity to get a job. That is what all the supports we are debating here today are for. They are for so that people can get closer to a job, make themselves employable and get a job in the future.

It would have been interesting if the alternative had been to take these 100 million from the support next year, or the 400 million it becomes in total when it is abolished, and add it to other types of labor market training or student support that should enable this group to get closer to work. The problem is that the government that the Sverigedemokraterna support, or in some cases certainly lead, does not provide those proposals. It does not provide more support. It does not provide more labor market policy measures so that people can actually be able to take a job.

The Sweden Democrats, through Alftberg, are welcome to explain to me how it is going to work for these individuals to be able to make themselves employable and be able to support themselves in the future.

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

Anders Alftberg (SD)

Mr. Speaker! It is very interesting that the member is so concerned about the study start support, a support that has declined in terms of interest and how many who are involved in it. I would say that there are other focus areas, other ways and other levels, for example municipal, to reach those who have great difficulties entering the labor market.

You Social Democrats say that you are investing so much in our students. We have noted here today that you are promising away Adidas shoes to high school youth, but when we look for it, there is no coverage for it. It is easy to promise broadly, but it matters to have the money as well.

(Applause)

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Mr. Speaker! The Left Party's view is that knowledge is a democratic right. One of the most important prerequisites for making knowledge and education accessible to more people is a student support system that provides social and economic security for students.

In order for the student grant to continue to have this recruiting effect, Vänsterpartiet believes that it must correspond to the students' living costs. And those are starting to change now, Mr. Speaker, and for the worse - because of this government and Sverigedemokraterna, who, in this difficult economic crisis for households, families with small children, and students, prioritize lowering taxes for the very richest. They prioritize providing subsidies for the rich's house cleaning and tiling of the bathroom.

The Government and the Sweden Democrats consider that in this budget, the total amount within the student support, that is, student grants and student loans, is intended in principle to cover reasonable living costs during the period of study. But it does not, Mr. Speaker. Food prices are increasing. Grid fees are rising. Rent increases are at their highest in decades. Public transport prices are increasing. Study materials cost money. Clothes cost money. Everything costs more. It is very expensive for our students.

For the fourth year in a row, SSCO presents the Stockholm student budget. They describe what the economic situation looks like for an average student in Stockholm.

According to their calculations, a student in Stockholm in 2024 is minus 4,585 kronor per month. Their conclusion is therefore that a student in Stockholm cannot cover necessary expenses solely with the help of student support. To afford it, the student must either work alongside their studies, borrow money, use any savings, or find alternative solutions to finance their living costs during their studies. The alternative is to cut back on less urgent expenses, for example, healthy food or dental care.

The survey shows that many students experience their financial situation as strained and that many live within small margins. More than half of the surveyed students stated that they feel stressed about their finances. And when studies are not allowed to be a full-time occupation for economic reasons, the risk of mental ill-health increases.

Mr. Speaker! This is how difficult it looks financially for many students across the country, not just for those who live in the capital. We cannot have it this way.

If the government and the Sweden Democrats judge that the student support is currently at a good level, if the government and the Sweden Democrats consider that a student can live on both the student grant and the student loan - which this year is 13,156 kronor per month - I have a question, Mr. Speaker. Why don't the right-wing parties try living as a student? They can pause the tax cuts and high fees that they give themselves and try living as a student does. This government and the Sweden Democrats do not seem to believe that an ordinary student in 2027 in Sweden goes into the red by 5,000 kronor a month.

Mr. Speaker! Vänsterpartiet considers that the social equalization goal within the state student support policy should be reintroduced. That the student support system provides students with social and economic security is, according to Vänsterpartiet, one of the most important prerequisites for making knowledge and education accessible to more people. Social equalization should therefore be one of the most central goals of the student support system. And therefore, we in Vänsterpartiet stand behind the reservation that is submitted.

Vänsterpartiet also wants to see an abolition of agency staff in healthcare from 2024. It is completely central that such a stop is combined with other measures from the state to secure the staffing supply within healthcare. We propose a ten-point program to abolish agency staff in healthcare with a special focus on the northern healthcare region and also sparsely populated regions.

Vänsterpartiet therefore wants to increase the number of places in the medical training and the nursing training. The librarian training also needs to be expanded. Therefore, an additional total of 81 million kronor is allocated for increased student support costs for the trainings.

Furthermore, those with healthcare education who choose to live and work in sparsely populated regions should be given the opportunity to write off their student debts. Therefore, 39 million kronor are allocated for this purpose.

It should be possible to receive student support throughout one's entire period of study, as higher education shall be regarded as full-time employment. Vänsterpartiet wants the grant proportion in student aid to increase, so that the debt burden does not become more burdensome. With higher grants and lower loans, the repayment of the student loan is facilitated. Vänsterpartiet therefore rejects the streamlining of the higher grant that the government proposes.

In total, Vänsterpartiet allocates 320 million kronor more than the government for student support in 2025.

It is also important that more people get the opportunity to study. For example, the unemployed can, for a shorter period, receive study start support to complete a high school education and increase their chances of getting a job. Therefore, Vänsterpartiet allocates 300 million kronor more than the government for 2025.

It is very poorly prioritized by the government to want to phase out the study start support. Now that unemployment is at its highest in ten years, the state needs to ensure that people with short previous education who are unemployed shall be given all the prerequisites to be able to enter the labor market.

Almost four out of ten students with study start support have a short primary education or lack education entirely. It is also common that students who have had that support continue to study with study support. Many who study with this support also have children. The support makes a difference for this group.

Fewer municipalities utilized these allocated funds during 2023, which may be a sign that it has become more difficult to find individuals who belong to the target group for study start support. This, in turn, may be due to fewer applicants meeting the unemployment condition. The regulatory framework for the unemployment condition was temporarily eased during the covid-19 pandemic. Suggestively, the government and Sverigedemokraterna could review the regulatory framework and ensure that more people learn that the support is available to apply for instead of phasing it out.

Mr. Speaker! Finally: Vänsterpartiet wants to see more active work against people falling into debt problems. It is still relevant today, especially now when the propensity to borrow has increased overall.

The student grant, and especially the student loan, is a significant source of income for students, particularly in economically difficult times. However, it means that more people have student loans today compared to before and that the debt is increasing. It also means that CSN debts sent to the Enforcement Authority for collection are increasing. Already in August this year, the sum of submitted debts was around 900 million kronor, and the Enforcement Authority predicts that we are heading towards a record year in 2024. It reflects the strained economic situation that many borrowers have right now. We cannot have it this way.

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

Lili André (KD)

Mr. Speaker! The slogans from Member Awad are best countered by reality. This government has now presented three budget bills, and in terms of distribution policy, the investment is greatest for those who have the lowest incomes. The Member cannot change reality through her assertions.

We have lowered the tax in all budget bills. That is good. Despite that, we are not yet at the point of restoring the tax reform's goal of half remaining. It might sound like those who have higher salaries hardly pay any tax. But the fact is that the person who has a monthly income of 125,000 kronor pays eleven times as much in tax as a person who earns 25,000 kronor a month. We therefore still have a progressive taxation.

It is we who stand on the side of the workers. We prioritize lowered taxes for wage earners who go to work every day. But you constantly highlight and nag about increased benefits.

This is good Christian Democratic policy. Fewer people believe, in fact, that lower taxes automatically lead to worse welfare. The reductions in marginal tax will not be a cost. It will be a revenue since we get better productivity, and rising productivity is a prerequisite for wages to be able to increase.

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, member, for the allegations! I did not hear that any question was asked, but rather that one wanted to somehow portray what I have said as a lie, as if I am not grounded in reality regarding the fact that this government and the Sverigedemokraterna have presented a budget that benefits the very richest in society. Because that is the reality.

I do not like when the government and the Sweden Democrats in various debates try to spread lies about what the Left Party, the Social Democrats, and the Green Party have raised in various debates regarding that the budget the government has presented with the help of the Sweden Democrats benefits the very richest in society. Almost half of the 60 billion goes to tax cuts that benefit the very richest. Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson gets a tax cut, the ministers in the government get tax cuts, and the CEOs of the large corporations in society get tax cuts.

But what is happening with the welfare? What is happening with the families with children? Today we are also talking about the students. Yes, they are having a harder time in this economic crisis.

Is it responsible, I ask the Christian Democrat Lili André. Is it responsible to present a budget like this and do so several times? It is not the first time that tax cuts are implemented for the very richest. Is it responsible to prioritize in this way? The Left Party does not think so.

As I mentioned in my main speech, students in Stockholm and in many other municipalities are behind by several thousand kronor every month. Is it responsible to let them suffer while the very richest receive subsidies for tiling bathrooms and to be able to consume more?

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

Lili André (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I want to repeat to Member Awad that the reduction of the marginal tax will not be a cost but a revenue for our welfare and for Sweden's growth. We get better productivity, and rising productivity is a prerequisite for wages to be able to increase.

Regarding the student grant, there is a free limit. We encourage students to work to some extent, and therefore we have this free limit. It is good to gain some work experience while studying.

The left-wing shadow budget requires tax increases and leads to even higher costs for the taxpayers. Again, Mr. Speaker, one must understand the economic calculation. The lowered marginal tax rate increases productivity.

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Mr. Speaker! When Finance Minister Elisabeth Svantesson says that it must pay off to earn around 140,000 kronor a month, she means that it should pay off to be a high-income earner here in the country. It must pay off to earn very, very well. That is also what this budget leads to. Those who are doing very well get even more.

It is true that Vänsterpartiet wants to see tax increases, but not for the pensioners, the sick leave recipients, or the unemployed. We want instead that the very richest in society are taxed more. So it is true that we want tax increases, but not for those who have it the toughest in the economic crisis.

I think that the government and the Sweden Democrats should just say it as it is. Say that it is these people you turn to! Then you would at least be telling the truth instead of lying in the chamber to those who are listening to us and those who will vote in the 2026 election that you have done something else, because you haven't.

I think you should take a moment to consider whether it is truly responsible to prioritize tax cuts for the very wealthiest and subsidies so that they can renovate or hire cleaning help for their villas.

I finally want to place more focus on the students, because they are having a very tough time. Now that unemployment is at its highest in ten years, it is a pity that you want to phase out the support that is intended to help students enter the labor market through education. It is an initiative that Vänsterpartiet wants to make. The government does not want that.

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! We stand here today before the decision on our report for expenditure area 15 Student Grants. Our proposal is a budget of 33.8 billion kronor. It is a scope that commands respect. Student grants secure students' economic situation, strengthen Sweden's competitiveness, and strengthen the adaptability in the economy.

Student financial aid is a fundamental pillar in our education system and has contributed to Sweden being ranked as one of the world's most equal countries when it comes to access to higher education. Through our proposal, we demonstrate an awareness of the challenges we face while simultaneously ensuring that the system remains sustainable and effective.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden is in a period of rapid change in the labor market. Digitalization, the climate transition, and an aging population are creating new skill requirements. To meet these, we need to educate more people, provide vocational training for more people, and enable more people to change careers in the middle of life. Here, the transition study support plays a particularly decisive role. It gives adults the opportunity to finance studies that strengthen their position in the labor market. It benefits society as a whole. It is important that the transition study support works effectively and reaches the right target groups.

The Government has taken into account the great interest in the transition study support and proposes both simplifications of rules and a resource reinforcement to the Central Study Support Board so that they can shorten processing times. It is a responsibility so that people can access and transition to new jobs, which is an opportunity to strengthen Sweden's economy.

At the same time, we strengthen the possibility for education by prioritizing more places within vocational adult education. This initiative is not only important for the individuals who participate in it but also for Sweden's growth and total competitiveness. By increasing the availability of education in shortage occupations, we contribute to meeting the labor market's needs and strengthening the welfare. A well-functioning student loan system is crucial for this.

Another example of the government's accountability is the decision to phase out the study start support (studiestartsstödet). It was intended to help people with short education to return to studies, but the volumes have been small and have decreased over time. Furthermore, there are indications that it has not reached the right target groups, and there is a risk of incorrect payments. Phasing out a support that does not function optimally is not a failure but evidence of having a reconsidering attitude towards the policy, something one would wish existed in more.

We ensure that the resources are used where they do the most good. It creates space for other and more effective interventions.

One could, of course, speak a lot about the division that exists within the opposition, about how the Social Democrats want to increase certain benefits, about how the Green Party wants to increase them even more, and about how the Left Party wants to write off student loans for those living in certain parts of the country. And while the Social Democrats want to retain the student start support, the Center Party wants to abolish it even faster.

One could, of course, devote a lot of time to this, and I had intended to say a few words about it. But during the debate, something much more serious has emerged to discuss.

Mr. Speaker! It is important that the Swedish Parliament takes its responsibility in the debate to say as it is. It is a particularly important task in the meeting that Members of Parliament have the great privilege of having with high school students who are visiting the Swedish Parliament. We must say as it is and not slide on the truth.

The Social Democrats propose no more money in their budget for the appropriation item Studiehjälp. It appears from the budget that Studiehjälp is the appropriation item for study grants to upper secondary school students. Despite that, Social Democrats say in the chamber, in speeches, in replies, and obviously to upper secondary school students who come here and expect that they can rely on the Members of Parliament they meet who say that it is 200 kronor more in the wallet that applies if the Social Democrats had been allowed to decide. It is worrying.

We say it as it is and do what is required. Therefore, I want to move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report.

(Applause)

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank Oliver Rosengren for giving me the opportunity to stand here again and speak about the priorities that we in the Social Democrats want to make. In our budget alternative and the motion that we have sent to the Swedish Riksdag, it is clear which priorities we want to make. We have allocated money to increase the student aid from CSN for upper secondary school students by 200 SEK per month. The Moderates and Oliver Rosengren do not want to do that. That is what this conflict is about. I understand why Oliver Rosengren and the Moderates would rather talk about a line in an appropriation than about the difference that exists in substance.

It is almost a bit like throwing stones in a glass house. Despite the fact that hundreds of civil servants in the Ministry of Finance are working on this, the government has sent countless correction notices to the budget bill that we are debating and making decisions on.

The fact remains: Regardless of what Oliver Rosengren stands here and talks about, there are major differences in priorities between the budget that we Social Democrats are presenting and the bill that the Moderates are standing and defending. We Social Democrats want to increase the student aid from CSN for upper secondary school students by 200 SEK a month. We also want to increase the child allowance by 200 SEK a month, because we want to protect families with children over large tax cuts for high-income earners, regardless of what Oliver Rosengren stands in the speaker's chair and says.

(Applause)

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! I am concerned that the member Sigvardsson unfortunately reads a bit too much in the speaking points and a bit too little in the budget items. Sweden is not governed via speaking points but via budget items. It is therefore what Niklas Sigvardsson calls "a line in a budget" that I want to talk about. That is how we govern this country.

Mr. Speaker! It doesn't matter what one says in the budget debate - what matters is what one proposes in their budget alternative. In the Social Democrats' budget proposal - in the underlying document we are here debating today - it appears clearly and distinctly from the appropriation item 1:1 Study Aid in Annex 7 that there is no increase in appropriations. There are therefore no funds for 200 kronor for upper secondary school students, despite what the Social Democrats say. The Social Democrats can of course say that, but had their budget become a reality after a decision in this chamber, there would not have been any 200 kronor for the upper secondary school students. It appears, in fact, from the Social Democrats' budget that there are no funds for it, even if it says so in the press release that Member Sigvardsson is reading out - it is not with that we govern the country.

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Now I am not standing as a member and reading from a press release, but I am standing and speaking about our budget motion in the Swedish Riksdag.

It is clear that Oliver Rosengren wants to steer the debate in another direction. Oliver Rosengren does not want, Mr. Speaker, to talk about the policy differences that exist between the Social Democrats and the Moderates. Oliver Rosengren does not want to talk about how high school students do not get 200 kronor more per month with the budget proposal that the Moderates have presented in this chamber.

As I said earlier, this is a bit strange, given that the government has hundreds of employees in the Ministry of Finance who send countless correction notices when it comes to the budgets. Then the debate is about this instead of being about the policy differences that actually exist between the Moderates and the Social Democrats.

It is very clear that we Social Democrats stand up for families with children all around this country by increasing the child allowance by 200 kronor a month and by wanting to increase the student grant for upper secondary school students by 200 kronor a month. That would have meant nearly 5,000 kronor for the families with children.

Now we stand here a few days before Christmas. The Christmas table will become record-expensive. Promises to ensure the finances of families with children would have been very good for them to receive.

Oliver Rosengren will, in his final speech, most likely once again stand and talk about budget lines. What is important to remember is that the policy differences are large: the Moderates want to lower taxes for high-income earners while we Social Democrats want to stand up for families with children.

(Applause)

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! Sweden is governed by budget items, not by talking points. I am happy to talk about our priorities. The Social Democrats do not prioritize 200 kronor for upper secondary school students. It is true that the government does not either. There is therefore no difference to debate, because the Social Democrats have the same proposal as we do, as evidenced by the tables.

If there had been any difference between our budget proposals, I would have gladly discussed that prioritization and stood by the fact that we do not propose 200 kronor more for high school students. But there is no difference, because the Social Democrats also do not propose a 200 kronor higher student grant for high school students. It would be strange if I made up that there is such a difference between the budget alternatives, as Member Sigvardsson does. It would be very misleading.

Instead, I would like to appeal to the very good quality of daring to admit mistakes. It could quite simply be that the Social Democrats have missed the difference between the budget items 1:1 and 1:2. In that case, it is surely no worse than saying that it has been wrong and that one will do better next time. Then one should perhaps also take the opportunity to apologize to the high school students to whom one has promised 200 kronor more without there being coverage for it in the budget option. That would have been an excellent solution.

Instead, one continues to persist in something that is not apparent in the budget. That, Mr. Speaker, I think is both unfortunate and irresponsible. It could happen that someone is listening to this budget debate, despite this late hour, and there might be another high school student that Member Sigvardsson should meet. In that case, it is important to stick to the truth, and the truth is that it is empty on this line in the Social Democrats' budget proposal.

(Applause)

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Mr. Speaker! Member Oliver Rosengren stands here and thinks it is so incredibly important to tell the truth and say it as it is. That is what has emerged in the member's main speech and a number of exchanges of remarks.

In Oliver Rosengren's presentation, it was portrayed that the study start support itself would be the problem. But that is not true. That is not what the Swedish National Audit Office finds in its audit report of the study start support. In the Swedish National Audit Office's audit report, it appears that the support has not reached its target group to a sufficient extent due to - lo and behold - how it has been handled by the government, state agencies, and municipalities that administer it. Thus, it is not the study start support itself that is wrong in its design.

The National Audit Office also writes, among other things, that Arbetsförmedlingen's cooperation with the municipalities is deficient and that there is a lack of effective information exchange between the municipalities and other educational actors, such as the folk high schools.

It is not the study start support that is a problem. It is the unemployment that is a problem. It is now the highest in ten years, and this government does not seem to want to do anything to rectify it.

It is important that more people get the opportunity to study, for example the unemployed, who for a shorter period can receive study start support to pursue an education and increase their chances of getting a job.

Why does Oliver Rosengren state an untruth by saying that it is important to phase out this support, when it is about how the government, among others, administers it?

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! It is true that the problem is unemployment. Unemployment is one of the biggest social problems Sweden has. It is for precisely that reason that we sharpen the work line, lower the tax on small incomes, and strengthen the incentives to work.

It is for that reason that we are currently preparing a subsidy reform with both subsidy ceilings and activity requirements so that everyone who is without work will know that there is someone to look in the eye who believes in you and knows that there is also a place for you in the labor market and that this country does not give up on anyone.

That is why we invest in vocational training and labor market training. That is why we invest in ensuring that all people who are currently unemployed because they lack education can train for work. We are also prepared to set requirements for that, because we know that requirements mean caring.

We will not give up until unemployment is fought. Unemployment is a poison for all of Sweden and a problem for all those people who today are left out and are not given the opportunity to feel that they are included and contributing. They do not have the opportunity to build their own future through work.

Therefore, we will of course do everything we can, Mr. Speaker, to combat unemployment. I want to give the member full credit that unemployment is the problem. Then we must be prepared to turn and re-examine different tools and instruments when they do not fully fulfill their function.

That is why we choose to allocate funds to what seems to work instead of to what does not seem to work.

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

Nadja Awad (V)

Mr. Speaker! We can observe that there is a desire to make enormous investments in order to be able to reduce unemployment, which is at its highest in ten years during this government's term. But why does one want to phase out something that would enable the unemployed to educate themselves so that they can enter the workforce?

It could be the purpose of the study start support if the government, state agencies, and municipalities that administer it do things differently. That is what the Swedish National Audit Office states in its audit report on the study start support. It should not be phased out. That is not the proposal.

What I wonder is quite simply: If the government seriously wants unemployed people with a short educational background to enter employment, or at least increase their chances of a job, why would one not want to reform the study start support instead of phasing it out?

One can absolutely say, as Member of Parliament Oliver Rosengren does, that one wants to make other investments. But say that instead. Do not make up that the support would be a problem in itself, because that is not true. That would have been the responsible thing to do, if Oliver Rosengren thinks it is so incredibly important to tell the truth in the chamber. In any case, I think so.

The question is: Would it not be better if the government could review the regulatory framework for the study start support instead of phasing it out?

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! For the person who is unemployed because they lack the competencies, experiences, knowledge, or skills demanded on the labor market, that is to say the person who is unemployed because they perhaps lack education, all the benefits they receive should probably be regarded as a study start support.

Our policy says that the person who is unemployed because they lack education shall educate themselves for work. If one does not do that, that is to say if one does not educate themselves when it is the lack of education that makes one unemployed, one shall not receive any benefits.

Therefore, all grants are study start support for those who are unemployed because they lack education. Then we do not need to have a specific grant called study start support, especially not one that has functioned poorly. If it then depends on some agency or some municipality, it does not play such a large role. The study start support has not functioned.

We are prepared to review most of the regulations concerning grants. One of the things we need in this country is sharper requirements that those who have no education and are therefore unemployed should educate themselves for work.

It is we who are very ready, Mr. Speaker, to both review and reform to ensure that those who are without education and are unemployed shall educate themselves for work and that it is a requirement in order to receive benefits.

(Applause)

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

Anders Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! Higher education available throughout the country, throughout life. Yes, that is one of the Center Party's three cornerstones in higher education policy.

Accessible - everyone should be able to familiarize themselves, to further their education.

The whole country - where you live should not prevent you from being able to continue your studies.

Throughout life - age or social circumstances should also not prevent you from continuing your studies.

To make education accessible throughout the country throughout life, a generous, dynamic and fair student loan system is needed where individuals can grow, where Sweden can grow.

Mr. Speaker! The Alliance had the common project of building Sweden with the work line. But the work line is not enough in our time. A new line for Sweden is needed, a competence line.

Sweden is moving in the wrong direction. Unemployment is rising to record levels while the government sits on its hands, school results are falling, the quality of research is declining, we are falling behind in innovation, and public education is put on hold. And not least, regardless of industry, it is a clear message that is being hammered out: skills shortage - always recurring regardless of industry - skills shortage.

The work line is about moving people from a benefit situation to the labor market and a job. It is good policy, but it is not enough. The competence line is a development where competence is necessary to be able to bridge the gap in the labor market.

The challenges are great for Sweden. We are at the beginning of an absolutely necessary green transition. Many countries are competing with us on a completely new level, not least in Asia. The development of AI will have an enormous significance. The pace is high and the scope is far-reaching. In short: The labor market is in transformation.

The Swedish response must be growth through the ability to be at the forefront and growth through the ability to be open to change. It is with competence as the engine in our enterprise and in the public sector that we can, in the long run, finance healthcare, school, and care.

Mr. Speaker! When the Centre Party decided on a new school policy program in the autumn of 2023, it was a signal from us regarding the value of education for Sweden. Now, with the competence line, we marry education policy with labor market policy, integration policy, and industrial policy to lift Sweden into the future.

The competence line applies to the entire labor market and for all professions. It applies to deeptech research, to agriculture, to the tourism industry, to labor immigration and integration. It applies to welders, nurses, assemblers, restaurant staff, entrepreneurs, teachers and business leaders. It applies to everyone. It is with competence that we can compete on the global stage.

Mr. Speaker! For the student aid area, we want to see at least five measures that support the competence line within the budget horizon. The five measures are set in relation to the government's budget.

Firstly: A more flexible student loan system that rewards students who complete their studies ahead of schedule but is also adapted for those in need of a slower pace of study, for example, people who have attended adapted upper secondary school or are on part-time sick leave.

Secondly: That the so-called exemption limit is abolished for the loan portion of student aid. We do not want to see obstacles to working alongside studies. Work provides both income and experience.

For the third: We want to see that students who are on part-time sick leave shall have the right to study grants and student loans on a part-time basis.

For the fourth: An expanded expansion of the vocational college where we add hundreds of millions of kronor over three years, and as a consequence thereof, increased grants for student aid for vocational college studies by 63 million kronor in 2025 and then 95 million kronor for 2026 and 2027.

For the fifth, we see in relation to the government that we further need to expand the transition study support and the processing at CSN. We therefore want to provide CSN with an additional 50 million kronor annually during the years 2025-2027.

In conclusion, I move for the approval of the joint reservation that exists.

(Applause)

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

Lili André (KD)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin by moving to approve the committee's proposal in the report on expenditure area 15 Student Grants.

This expenditure area amounts to nearly 34 billion kronor. The Swedish student grant is one of the world's most generous student grant systems and shall continue to be so. It is fundamental for equal education and gives everyone, regardless of gender and background, the opportunity to study. Collectively, the student grant contributes to a high participation in education. It is also an important and well-functioning part of our education policy.

The generous and flexible student support system breaks patterns of inequality and gives more people the chance to reach their full potential. It creates conditions not only for the individual but also for Sweden as a nation to grow with knowledge. This contributes to society's development, growth, and welfare.

Mr. Speaker! Student financial aid has a positive effect on the economy over time and enables lifelong learning. We also have the very beneficial transition student aid, which provides good opportunities for further education. Pleasantly enough, there is a great interest in the transition student aid. Those who apply and who meet the criteria receive the aid, thanks to a government that has listened to the needs of the Central Student Aid Board.

The government is providing additional funds for both the current year and in this budget. In the budget, the government is allocating an additional 50 million kronor to CSN and simplifying the regulatory framework for the transition study support. Through this, the administrative burden for CSN has been eased and the process has become more efficient. This ensures that the applicants receive their decisions in time and can begin their studies without unnecessary delays. It is an important step to meet the large demand that exists.

Mr. Speaker! We live in constant change, especially with the rapid global changes that are occurring and which also affect Sweden. For this government, it is important to follow up and evaluate. The student support system is now to be reviewed so that the system will be compliant with today's and the future's education system and with the labor market's needs. It is about ensuring the right priorities and that everyone who wants to study shall have the opportunity to do so.

I also want to take the opportunity to highlight the student support from an entrepreneur's perspective. The transition study support is aimed at those in employment and gives them the opportunity to increase their competence in the middle of their lives. It is an important tool for strengthening the workforce's competence and adaptability in a rapidly changing labor market. It gives people the opportunity to replenish knowledge throughout their lives regardless of where in the country they live, which is exactly what Sweden's labor market needs.

By investing in research and higher education, we can ensure that Sweden continues to be a leading knowledge nation. Strong educational institutions increase the quality for our students. The Government has made the largest investment ever in research and innovation by increasing the grants by 1.5 billion kronor for the year 2025. This will strengthen Sweden's competitiveness even further and contribute to long-term growth.

Many industries have difficulty finding labor with the right education and competence. This applies particularly to industries that need people with upper secondary vocational education. The upper secondary school's apprenticeship programs are, in that context, an important complement to the school-based vocational educations. The apprenticeship programs give students a close connection to future workplaces, and employers are given good opportunities to fill future competence needs.

Therefore, it is pleasing that the government also proposes that the level of the apprentice allowance be increased by 1,000 kronor per month, from 500 kronor per month to 1,500 kronor per month. No one should have to rule out an apprenticeship education for economic reasons.

Mr. Speaker! Student financial aid is an investment in our future. By continuing to improve and streamline our student financial aid system, we can ensure that everyone is given the opportunity to educate themselves, reach their full potential, and contribute to the development of society.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I move again for the approval of the proposals in the report.

(Applause)

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

Camilla Hansén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! Good evening, colleagues! I want to begin by clarifying that we in Miljöpartiet are not participating in the budget decision because we are investing more than the government is in the expenditure area of student support. I do, however, move for approval of the joint reservation from Socialdemokraterna, Vänsterpartiet, Centerpartiet, and Miljöpartiet regarding the target for student support.

This goal was established in the student support reform of 2001 and clarified in the budget bill of 2016. Last year, the government removed that student support should level differences between individuals and groups in the population and thereby contribute to increased social justice. For Miljöpartiet, it is an important part of the goal of student support, and we want it to be reintroduced.

Everyone should be able to study at a college or university, regardless of where one comes from in society and in the country. Miljöpartiet wants to make it easier to take the step to further studies by improving students' housing situation and economic security. Those who choose to study further should be able to manage financially. Receiving financial support from parents is not an opportunity for everyone, and it should also not be a prerequisite for taking the step to further studies.

I have noted that some mention the exemption limit. It is reasonable, and even good for studies, to work to some extent. However, one should not be forced to work as much as part-time, or perhaps even full-time, in order to be able to complete one's studies. The results will, in fact, become worse. Even if one can manage to get a passing grade, the results will be worse than they would be if one could focus on the studies.

Mr. Speaker! Sweden has one of the world's most generous student grant systems. It is something we actually must safeguard, because it has led to us having one of the world's most educated peoples. We received something of a receipt for that in the OECD's survey of adults' ability to read and write and their problem-solving skills. This is something we need to handle the societal challenges we face with global megatrends such as climate change, migration, digitalization and changed demographics.

Students invest time and money in their own and Sweden's future. A strong student support system is an important way for Sweden to invest in the students here and now. It is not just about the future, but it is also about daring to become a student and about life here and now when one is a student.

I will give some examples of why we are allocating more money than the government and - if I haven't misread any line - more than all other parties when it comes to student grants.

We are raising the student grant for students and upper secondary school students. We are financing student grants for the Ukrainian refugees who are in Sweden. We are also financing an expansion of sign language education for hearing parents of deaf children. The government is also doing that, a little bit, but we are doing it a little more.

We also continue to finance CSN's work with the administration of the transition study support based on what they say they need.

During that time, Miljöpartiet pushed through a 300 kronor increase in the student grant in the government. We can see in the budget table that it costs quite a bit. There is a difference between saying that one sees that there is a need and actually financing a change. One could think that 300 kronor a month perhaps is not enough. Yes, it is at least better than nothing.

Students are a group with small economic margins, and economic stress affects students negatively. Miljöpartiet wants that student grants should create better conditions for more people to pursue further education and feel economic security.

The grant component of the student grant has long lagged behind price developments, and single-student households belong to a group that has been hit hard by the cost increases of recent years regarding rents, food, course literature, and other living costs.

Miljöpartiet also considers that the level of the student grant for students in upper secondary school should be protected through indexing. In the same way, we propose that the child allowance also be safeguarded.

Persons who have a residence permit with temporary protection according to the mass influx directive are not entitled to receive student support from CSN. This applies regardless of whether they are registered in the population register or covered by LMA. Generally, a permanent residence permit is required to be able to receive student support from CSN.

Based on the government's proposal to advance the population registration for Ukrainian refugees with temporary protection, and considering that a larger proportion of the Ukrainian refugees are already registered in the population register, we are also financing student grants for that group.

Mr. Speaker! In Sweden, approximately 200 children are born every year who have a hearing impairment or are deaf, and approximately the same number suffer a hearing injury during their upbringing. The vast majority, 95-98 percent, of them have parents who are hearing.

As a parent of a child with deafness or hearing impairment, one has the right to basic education in sign language. One also has the right to 240 hours of education in sign language during the child's upbringing. That is not much time to learn a language. When we talk about learning languages, we always talk about it taking time. Therefore, Miljöpartiet is investing in that this group should be able to develop their sign language so that they can also be able to follow their children's development during their upbringing.

Mr. Speaker! It is evening, and we do not need to drag this out any further. I move for the approval of the reservation that the student grant shall again aim to level differences between individuals and groups in the population and contribute to increased social justice.

Miljöpartiet does not participate in the budget decision but refers instead to our special statement.

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! I have only one short question for Member Hansén. You spoke about your proposal to increase the study grants for upper secondary school students. At what budget point have you budgeted for that proposal?

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

Camilla Hansén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I understand now, and I also feel a bit disappointed that it is more interesting to scrutinize the budgets of certain opposition parties than others. But this is at the right point of focus.

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

Oliver Rosengren (M)

Mr. Speaker! For the sake of clarity, I just want to ensure that by "correct budget line," Member Hansén means budget line 1.1 Study Aid, where you have proposed 800 million, and not budget line 1.2 Student Grants, where Miljöpartiet has proposed 1.5 billion.

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

Camilla Hansén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! It is not without me wondering whether the member is thinking about which party I represent.

But the point of Miljöpartiet spending the most money of all parties on student grants is that we think it is important. We think it is important for families with children, we think it is important for upper secondary school students and we think it is important for students to receive more money.

My experience here in the chamber, Mr. Speaker, is that all parties probably understand that students' finances are strained. They are thin. The increased costs that we all see have also hit students hard.

That is why we are making these investments in student grants. It is an important social investment. Sweden, in fact, has great challenges that we need to manage as a country. We need people with a good education. We also need to ensure that everyone, regardless of where in the country one lives and regardless of what background one has - I believe a member previously here in the rostrum spoke about how regardless of how many shelf meters of books there are in one's parental home - higher education should be something that one feels one can take part in and is welcome to without worrying about finances. Thank you for tonight, everyone!

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 12 December.)

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