Response to interpellation 2022/23:127 on measures to break segregation
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
L argues that the consequences of segregation affect people in socioeconomically challenged areas and that the government proposes investments in school, work, and civil society. L wants to use location data to monitor developments and emphasizes the importance of children learning to read and write 1. L believes that narrow migration and tougher regulations are necessary 2. L argues that Sweden has fantastic tools through tuition-free schools and universities 1. L emphasizes the importance of young people taking responsibility for their studies and that social services seek out families 1. L argues that the urgent matter is to stop the spiral of violence 1. L explains that the Tidö Agreement focuses on specific areas 3. L argues that investments in education, work, and combating crime counteract segregation 3. 4 S considers the government's response to be devoid of ideas and that the dissolution of the Delegation against Segregation as well as abolished investment supports contribute to increased segregation 4. 5 S argues that a strict migration policy must be combined with support and not cuts in labor market policy 5. 6 S considers breaking segregation to be a high-priority issue 6. S argues that continued strict migration policy and high demands on the individual are required 6. S argues that S wants to invest in active labor market policy and adult education, while the government chooses to cut there 6. S argues that the government lacks a plan or intention to break segregation as the word does not appear in the Tidö Agreement 6.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Arbetsmarknads- och integrationsministern Johan Pehrson (L)
Madam Speaker! Teresa Carvalho has asked me if I intend to take any measures to break segregation and, if so, which ones. Given that the causes and consequences of segregation affect several policy areas, Teresa Carvalho has also asked whether the government will coordinate the work within the Government Offices to combat segregation and, if so, how.
The consequences of segregation affect the entire society but particularly hit those people who live in areas with socioeconomic challenges and whose lives and freedom are restricted. This includes, among other things, unemployment and welfare dependency, poor school results, health problems, insecurity and vulnerability due to crime as well as honor-related violence and oppression, as well as housing segregation and overcrowding. Today's exclusion risks maintaining and recreating segregation and inequality across generations.
Many measures are required to reduce exclusion and increase people's freedom and life chances in areas with socioeconomic challenges. In the budget bill for 2023, the government proposes investments in several policy areas, including regarding preschool, school, work, civil society and democracy, preventive measures to combat honor oppression, as well as to combat crime.
In order for the development of, among other things, unemployment, social assistance, and school results in different areas to be able to be followed over time, Sweden's good access to individual data needs to be combined with a good access to location data. The Government therefore allocates 5 million to Boverket in the budget bill for 2023 to secure continued access to analysis and monitoring tools with location data. The Government assesses that the measures and tools developed by, among others, SCB are important for the continued work in accordance with the goal for the area. Boverket received in the regulatory letter for 2023 the mandate to manage and develop tools with location data.
The work against socioeconomic segregation is influenced by factors within several areas. General measures need to be complemented with targeted measures. To reduce exclusion and segregation, a common and coordinated effort is required at national, regional, and local levels.
The Government sees a great need to lift vulnerable areas in the long term, implement pattern-breaking measures to stop the gangs and act forcefully against youth crime, as well as promote a compensatory school with quality throughout the country.
Teresa Carvalho (S)
Madam Speaker! I naturally thank the Minister for Integration for the answer, but I must say that I find it to be strikingly thoughtless. To be honest, I would have expected, or at least hoped for, a bit more. I do not know if it is due to a lack of time, low ambitions, or disagreement between the parties in the government base, but I think the answer was thin.
Breaking segregation is an incredibly important issue for me and the Social Democrats. We strive for a society that holds together, and in that, we cannot have any parallel societies. Today, it is evident that we have a segregation that tears apart our social cohesion, which increases mistrust in society and which fuels crime.
When we were in government, we began a strategic work to turn over every stone to break down segregation. This included, among other things, a shift towards a strict migration policy. We went to the election on a platform to ramp up the work of breaking down segregation, and we want to see a cross-party general plan to tackle the segregation problems from the root.
It is the origin of this interpellation debate. I simply want to ask what the government intends to do to continue that work.
Unfortunately, the government and the Sweden Democrats have started the mandate period by lowering ambitions in a number of areas, which will likely instead contribute to increased segregation. For example, we have the decommissioning of the Delegation against Segregation and with it the state grants that municipalities and other actors could apply for from the agency for measures to counter segregation. Another example is the abolished investment support for building new rental apartments, which was important for physically building away the segregation. A further example is the Settlement Act, which according to the Tidö Agreement shall be dismantled so that wealthy municipalities without a large diaspora can escape their share of the responsibility for the newly arrived who will come anyway. We also see billion-kronor cuts in adult education and labor market measures at the same time as we enter a recession.
The last point I think is almost the most noteworthy, because perhaps the most obvious reason for the segregation is that we have people who have come to Sweden who have not succeeded to a sufficient extent in establishing themselves on the Swedish labor market. This applies particularly to foreign-born women.
With all respect for the government's desire to preserve 5 million kronor to secure and move data to Boverket when it shuts down the Delegation against Segregation, and with all respect for the 50, admittedly important and legitimate, millions for women's organizing in vulnerable areas, which we Social Democrats also stand behind, it is quite poor and hardly a solution for breaking the segregation.
Otherwise, there is quite a lot of talk from the Tidö parties about paradigm shifts. I wonder: Where is the paradigm shift to break segregation, Johan Pehrson? I hope that the Minister for Integration realizes that the solution to segregation is not to withdraw interpretation assistance in healthcare or to introduce reporting laws. That type of cowardly proposal, which clearly bears the Sverigedemokraterna seal, is rather aimed at a completely different type of paradigm shift, namely the one concerning society's decency.
Arbetsmarknads- och integrationsministern Johan Pehrson (L)
Madam Speaker! Few things are as important as giving people hope and reasonable expectations about their future in Sweden, whether they have come to our country or perhaps have a parent generation that came here earlier.
We have seen how integration has functioned reasonably well over the years, but never painlessly and never without problems. It is clear that the situation we have right now, with an exclusion that has taken hold, requires reflection. I am therefore pleased that the Social Democrats in opposition are now standing behind the Liberals' migration policy.
I am also pleased that when it comes to integration, there is a readiness to include more than just income facts, because what we sometimes hear – that people become criminals depending on that they are unemployed – is incredibly crude and quite unfair. And it is not true, but it is other causes that are strongly contributing to crime, not least that the gangs have been allowed to run far too freely.
I see with some singular exception that the Social Democrats, in addition to migration and integration, also stand behind the crime policy in all essential aspects. This I welcome. I think it is good, but there are a few parties left. We know how it has sounded. Several parties, not least the Liberals, have long had a simple rhetoric – that we should open our hearts and that we do not build any walls in Sweden, as the former Prime Minister said. It has been thought that this can be maintained, but realpolitik has become clear. It is that we now see being implemented.
Then this does not have to mean that the Liberals or the Social Democrats lower their international ambitions or no longer have their international outlook on the world, but we have such large integration problems in Sweden that we must have a fairly narrow migration to Sweden in the coming years. That is why we hold fast to a tougher regulatory framework for labor migration. We also safeguard the right of asylum without any levels, but otherwise, it is more difficult to come to Sweden.
This is connected to tackling the integration problems we have. There, we focus entirely on the school, with earlier and clearer interventions, and we focus on language in preschool. During the election campaign, there were some discussions about whether it was appropriate to ensure that parents are encouraged in different ways and that they, if the children do not get access to the Swedish language, at least are required to have a small conversation and so on. That was the debate we had.
It starts in preschool and continues in school, and then it should be completed in upper secondary school. This is integration policy for everyone. When one is out and talking about this, one hears that it is education, education, and education and integration, integration, and integration. But this is based on including the obvious: Learn Swedish! Behave! There must be consequences for those who do not behave.
When one listens to the police in Sweden right now who are trying to handle the catastrophe situation that Sweden has been led into, one feels that it will take some time before we get a handle on the crime development. One must remember who is hit hardest. It is those people who are already vulnerable and who already live segregated, even though it more and more often occurs that shootings happen almost everywhere.
Teresa Carvalho (S)
Madam Speaker! It was I myself who opened up for this to partially become a migration debate, so I understand that Johan Pehrson devoted a large part of his answer to that. I can join in on that. It is entirely true that Sweden for a long time and under many governments has had an insufficient migration policy, which has also affected integration negatively.
I have no problem saying that it is obvious that society's ability to offer housing, education, jobs, social integration, and community has been lacking, with segregation, overcrowding, exclusion, and social tensions as a consequence. That is why we Social Democrats shifted to a strict migration policy during our time in government.
I perceived, Madam Speaker, that the Social Democrats and the Liberals stood quite close to each other in the Migration Committee. It is not migration policy that constitutes the great dividing line in Swedish politics, but rather it is the will to truly tackle integration and break the segregation. A strict migration is admittedly a prerequisite for us to manage to break the segregation, but it is not enough here and now.
An offensive integration policy is also needed. We seem to agree on this, at least in terms of wording, but it needs to contain both support and requirements. My point is that it needs to contain both. A coin has two sides, and it does not work to only do one or the other. That is why we Social Democrats made it an obligation to participate in establishment measures, not just a right, as the Alliance government did. We also introduced a mandatory education for newcomers who need education to enter the workforce, but the requirements, as stated, need to be accompanied by support, not by cuts in the active labor market policy and adult education.
Without trying to sugarcoat or in any way turn a blind eye to the shortcomings and problems, I can state that despite the record-high reception during the refugee crisis in 2015, the establishment time was halved under the Social Democratic government, so we did something right in the labor market policy to get more newcomers into work.
We will, of course, review and follow up on how things go for the new government, and I sincerely wish them good luck, for Sweden's sake. But I fear that we will instead see a development with a slower establishment time, given the heavily cut resources for the active interventions.
Madam Speaker! It cannot be overemphasized how important it is that all children get to see their mothers and fathers go to work. I believe that it is the best thing we can do to break the segregation and, in the long run, also break the recruitment to the criminal gangs.
Then, of course, a broader approach was also needed, with a policy to reduce economic inequalities, to lift the vulnerable residential areas, and to ensure that mothers and fathers can live on their wages and not just have a job. Promotion of a stronger sense of community was also needed.
Point by point, we have seen that the government, as I mentioned initially, is taking measures that will increase segregation. Now we hear that the Minister for Employment and Integration points to the school. We completely agree that it is an important part of the work to break down segregation, but again: I had hoped for more and for some more concrete thoughts.
In conclusion, I must say that the school is particularly interesting given the school segregation we have and that the Minister for Integration chooses to focus on the school's part in the integration work.
Arbetsmarknads- och integrationsministern Johan Pehrson (L)
Madam Speaker! I am not shy, but I can say that the freedom for a person to choose a school, regardless of their wallet, is important. In many other countries, one sees how privileged people take their children to special schools, but in Sweden, all parents have the right to choose a school. I think it is good that that diversity exists.
We are now implementing a reform in the independent school area that we believe well meets the problems we have seen and which very few have acted upon over the last 30 years to counteract. So that is not what we are worried about.
What we are looking at in school is that students should read, read, read and write, write, write. And one should be a bit careful with the digital tools. This applies to all members of Parliament in the chamber as well.
It is very important to have a focus on knowledge. That requires more special education teachers, it requires more small teaching groups, and it requires more social teams, which have been worked with in Järva and raised school results. Children who do not come to school are a problem. Children who are in school and have their "brallos full of ants" – as it was called before – have another problem. In that case, one must work so that they manage to get through school. These initiatives are the most important. It begins in school, and it ends in school. It is a vaccination against almost all segregation. If the children manage school, there are minor problems.
We agree on this entire journey: a nearly fee-free preschool for many, a fee-free primary school, and a fee-free upper secondary school. Then we have universities in this country, among the best in many areas and sometimes the best, and they are fee-free. In Sweden, you even get paid to study.
The tools in Sweden are, therefore, fantastic. But we must work together to explain this to young people today. Regardless of how much they sit in the school bench today, they must read for themselves. We cannot help them. They must read, count, and write and take this responsibility when the temptations to do something else are very great. They simply must pass the marshmallow test. This does not only apply to young people.
We are making investments in sports and women's organizing and in measures so that social services can seek out families who are struggling - one can undeniably have a hard time if one lives in a vulnerable area - and help with the problem and do even more to facilitate and actually plead for children to go to preschool in order to break the segregation if they do not speak Swedish at home. All of this is very important.
In conclusion, I argue that there are good conditions for us to be able to continue at the level with an active and effective labor market policy that has been pursued previously and which has led to lower unemployment, not least by the Social Democrats at the end of the previous mandate period undertaking a shift in perspective in terms of placing more demands alongside offering some of what I have mentioned now in the form of help and support and not least from Arbetsförmedlingen.
There are, therefore, good conditions. But the most acute thing is to stop the spiral of violence that is now consuming victims, taking the lives of people, extinguishing dreams and crushing everything that freedom is called - at least liberal freedom. These are people who involve very young children, and they ruin lives for themselves and for others for a long time to come. It is a catastrophe we see. We must therefore also focus on getting order on our streets.
Teresa Carvalho (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for Integration that we have been able to have this important debate today. Breaking segregation is an incredibly important and high-priority issue for me and for the Social Democrats.
I truly regret that the government was unable to formulate clearer ambitions in the interpellation response I have received. It is also somewhat surprising given that there is now a fairly broad consensus among experts that, alongside the repressive measures, which we all agree are needed to break up the gangs, it is also required that we break the segregation.
We also agree that a continued strict migration policy and high requirements for the individual to do what can be done to establish themselves in Sweden and on the Swedish labor market are needed. These are the conditions for us to succeed in breaking the segregation.
But there is also no doubt that we differ when it comes to the ambition for society's active interventions. In that regard, I am thinking primarily of that we Social Democrats want to invest in active labor market policies and adult education, while the government chooses to cut back there.
I am convinced that the Liberal Party's party leader Johan Pehrson has a genuine will to improve integration. But the question that gnaws at me is whether the government, which is led by the Sverigedemokraterna, has a plan, or even an intention, to break the segregation.
I also took the liberty of searching for the word segregation in the Tidö Agreement and in the regulatory letter to Arbetsförmedlingen for safety's sake. I got zero hits - nothing. That is quite telling. Perhaps that is also the explanation for the rather idea-poor response I received initially.
Arbetsmarknads- och integrationsministern Johan Pehrson (L)
Madam Speaker! The cooperation agreement between the coalition parties, popularly called the Tidö Agreement, is in no way comprehensive. It is a number of areas covered where we agree on a direction that the government shall pursue and which is combined with us preparing a budget. Then it becomes broader. Then one has a cooperation also in terms of the budget. Everyone knows it is easy to say one thing. But it is also about having the resources for it.
When one looks at this entire area and the investments being made in labor market policy and education policy, it is an incredible number of billions that we are investing in helping people. Then we have complemented this by now, not least through the cooperation we had during the previous parliamentary term when it comes to transition support, added further healthy billions to help people to constantly be able to work with knowledge advancement and with learning new things and reducing the risk of unemployment and increasing the opportunities to get a new job if they want to change or if for some other reason they have been left without work.
When it comes to segregation, we constantly write about education, about work, about civil society, about the importance of strengthening the democratic foundations, women's rights and the independence of the courts, and about combating crime. All of this, and not least the work against honor-related violence and oppression and combating the separatists who actively show their presence these days and who want something else with the country Sweden compared to what we agree on and what stands in our constitution today, we write about as much as anything. It is about countering segregation and increasing integration.
I still want to conclude with what I have said a few times during the afternoon, and it is about continuing to work with language, work, and diligence. It is not more difficult than that. But it still requires its billions so that tens of thousands of employees in the state service can do this work every day on behalf of, among others, the Riksdag and the government.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.