Response to interpellation 2023/24:26 on the management of popular education

Utbildningsministern Mats Persson (L)

Mr. Speaker! Linus Sköld has asked me how I intend to act to ensure that the content of popular education remains free from political steering and how I intend to act so that popular education's contribution to democracy and the free formation of opinion is not weakened in the reform that is currently taking place.

To begin with, I want to be clear that I see folkbildning as an important force in society and for our democracy. One of folkbildning's great strengths lies in that the activity is based on people's free and voluntary pursuit of knowledge based on common interests. This is something the government safeguards.

Mr. Speaker! A prerequisite for folk education to be able to contribute to strengthening Swedish society is that the state grants that the state distributes to study associations and folk high schools are used specifically for folk education activities. In recent years, unfortunately, several cases of fraud and inaccuracies have been discovered in the study associations' activities. The self-governance model for the distribution of state grants to folk education is criticized. The National Audit Office, in an audit of the state grant to the study associations, has stated that there are deficiencies in all stages of the control and follow-up of the state grant.

In this situation, a thorough review of the model for the distribution of state grants to folk education needs to be conducted and alternative models considered, in order to safeguard free and voluntary folk education activities. The Government has therefore decided on additional directives for the investigation Steering and monitoring of folk education - choices for the future. The investigator shall now, among other things, analyze the current model for steering and distribution of state grants to folk education in order to make it more purposeful, transparent, and predictable, as well as reduce the risk of fraud and inaccuracies. Within the framework of this analysis, the investigator shall consider whether one or more existing agencies should handle the steering and the allocation of funds instead of the Folkbildningsrådet. The assignment shall be reported by June 14, 2024, at the latest.

Mr. Speaker! According to the commission's proposal, measures are needed to ensure a more purposeful distribution of state grants to folk high schools and study associations. Today, the Riksdag is referred to base its decision on folk education as a whole when determining the grant for folk education. In the budget bill for 2024, the Government proposes that the Riksdag shall instead decide in the future on a grant for study associations and a grant for folk high schools. Through this arrangement, it is judged that the accuracy of the state grant will increase and thus its contribution to society. It will also reduce the need for state detailed regulation through targeted investments to study associations or folk high schools and thereby contribute to safeguarding free and voluntary folk education.

Mr. Speaker! I want to be clear that the government is not proposing a cut to the folk high schools in the budget bill for 2024, but instead proposes that the state grant to the folk high schools be strengthened. The strengthening is proposed to amount to 100 million kronor in 2024 and is expected to reach this level permanently. The government assesses that this general strengthening is an important priority in a time when many folk high schools are struggling with finances and when the needs of each folk high school vary.

Mr. Speaker! Finally, I want to emphasize that the government, in the budget bill for 2024, proposes that approximately 2.4 billion kronor be distributed in state grants to folk high schools and that approximately 1.7 billion kronor be distributed in state grants to study associations in 2024. The state support for adult education is thus proposed to also be extensive in the future. Through this support, the important adult education activities of the folk high schools and study associations will also in the future strengthen Swedish democracy and Swedish society.

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Mr. Speaker! The foundation of a true democratic society is an educated and participating population. Without it, it is not a true democracy. So describes Helén Pettersson, the chair of ABF, the value of folk education.

One could say that the Liberals' voters agree. Almost 90 percent of the Liberals' voters agree with the statement that knowledge and education are important so that everyone can participate in the democratic development of society. 70 percent of the Liberals' voters agree with the statement that politicians should not micro-manage the activities of study associations, according to a Sifo poll.

The Liberals' own study association is led by association head Johan Fyrberg. When the government presented its budget, which included the proposal for the division of the grant and the draconian reduction in the study associations' activities, Johan Fyrberg commented. He said that the proposal is a death blow for adult education in Sweden, and that it was a question of a significantly larger reduction than they had expected and what is reasonable in the time we are in. Adult education reaches, not least, people who stand furthest from society, furthest from the labor market. It is by engaging those groups that one holds a country together. This is what Johan Fyrberg has said in SVT.

Here the minister stands and gives the impression of being a champion of popular education. Popular education is an important force, and he guards that popular education should be free and voluntary. It may be that he would like to be a champion for popular education, but the facts speak against the minister. The government's large savings on folk high schools last year, i.e., this year's budget, together with large cost increases, have led to a difficult economic situation for the country's folk high schools. In next year's budget, study associations are attacked instead. A third of their funding is to be removed. The management of popular education and the distribution of the money to popular education shall be moved closer to politics. In the long run, increased detailed regulation and reduced autonomy will naturally lead to political influence over the content of popular education.

Why, then, does the minister claim that he is a champion of popular education? Yes, because his own voters think that he should be, because his own study association thinks that he should be, and because heavy referral bodies, such as Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner, reject the proposal to split the grant between study associations and folk high schools.

There are compelling reasons for the minister to stand here and pretend that he is a champion of popular education. But he is not, because he has aligned himself with the Sverigedemokraterna's policy. Most recently, when Sverigedemokraterna presented their own state budget, it contained billion-kronor cuts to popular education. It is no secret that Sverigedemokraterna is an authoritarian party, and authoritarian parties and authoritarian regimes do not want education to be free and voluntary. Instead, the authority should decide what people are allowed to learn. An educated population is much harder to rule.

My questions remain: How will the minister ensure that the public education shall continue to be free in content and voluntary for the participants?

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

Gunilla Svantorp (S)

Mr. Speaker! I was pleased to hear the answer, namely that the Minister sees folkbildning as an important force in society and for our democracy. All the stranger is that it is presented in the answer as if cheating and errors are still ongoing. I also think it is strange, when we know that folkbildning is facing major cuts, to say that folkbildning is an important force in society.

I have had the privilege of sitting on the board of the Folkbildningsrådet during some tough years when many changes have occurred. I want to emphasize two things, namely that, firstly, there has been cheating and inaccuracies, and secondly, it is a fact that both Folkbildningsrådet and the studieförbund have taken many measures, something that the minister chooses not to highlight in his response. It would have been pleasant if the minister had done so. Since he has not done so, I thought I would highlight some of the measures. It is important that those who see the debate and who will read it afterwards know that measures have been taken.

In 2021, an 18-point list of measures for strengthened control was issued. In 2022 and 2023, the reports were followed up on to increase knowledge. Some of the changes and improvements that have been implemented involve, among other things, digital reporting. This means that it becomes easier to detect inaccuracies, and it concerns the fact that study associations have introduced cross-checks to detect double reporting, that is, when one reports to several study associations at the same time. These changes are now being implemented during the ongoing operational year, which means that the inaccuracies are detected immediately.

Another thing is that the requirements for the follow-up controls are made clearer and spot checks are conducted. Another thing is that both the Folkbildningsrådet and the studieförbunden have increased their staffing so that they can perform better follow-ups and controls.

Another thing is that the Folkbildningsrådet demands internal control with more systematicity and requirements for equality. A new state subsidy system has also been introduced which focuses on the assessment of quality in the operations. There are also whistleblower functions at the study associations to capture signals regarding incorrect use of subsidies or other irregularities.

Mr. Speaker! I have also previously been chairman of ABF Värmland. After having been chairman, I know that adult education throughout our country makes an enormous difference for many people who get a second, third, fourth, or fifth chance. The Minister knows that too.

I would really like to thank Linus Sköld for submitting this important interpellation, which unfortunately is not receiving any good answers. But answers can come during the debate.

In the 1947 proposition regarding measures for promoting free and voluntary folk education, which was submitted after the 1944 folk education inquiry, it appears that state support must not lead to the freedom of the educational work being restricted. Through bureaucratization, one of the most important prerequisites for free educational work would be taken away. Then it concludes that the folk education work shall be free and voluntary.

How will the government ensure that the Sweden Democrats are not allowed to govern what the folk education does and who participates in the folk education work?

(Applause)

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

Serkan Köse (S)

Mr. Speaker! I would also like to begin by thanking my colleague Linus Sköld for this important interpellation and thank the Minister for the answer.

It is paradoxical, Mr. Speaker, to stand here and debate the importance of popular education, especially regarding study associations, with a liberal Minister for Education. History shows that the Liberals have always been advocates of education and freedom. In the Liberals' cultural policy document, which I have with me in the rostrum, on cultural policy priorities, it is stated that the Liberals promise to strengthen popular education. But despite promises of long-term support for popular education, we now find ourselves in a different reality.

The people's movement party Liberalerna clearly deviates from its own tradition and pursues a policy that harmonizes with the Sweden Democrats' restrictive view on popular education. Where did the liberal principle go, Mats Persson?

Mr. Speaker! The Folkbildningsrådet has repeatedly accounted for how they work to strengthen the quality and transparency of folk education. In reports that they have published, which Gunilla Svantorp also explained very well, it is stated that there are effective tools to ensure the quality of the studieförbund.

Mr. Speaker! Let me say a few words about the self-governance model, which the Minister also says in the response constitutes the core of Swedish folk education. This model emphasizes folk education autonomy, its right to set its own agenda and define its own content. This core must not be compromised by political power struggles.

Mr. Speaker! I and many others are very concerned about the risk that the folkbildningen will become a political battlefield, when historically it has been a place for free opinion-forming and a meeting place for people from all backgrounds. I also want to know what the Minister says regarding this concern.

Mr. Speaker! Folkbildningen has a central role in Sweden as a source of democracy, participation, and bridge-building. To deviate from this tradition is to undermine its foundations. And the folkbildnings actors have been governed by their own activities through a proven self-governance model. To move away from this now would be to undermine the very heart of what folkbildningen represents.

Mr. Speaker! When forces such as the Sweden Democrats try to influence popular education with its allied liberal actors, we Social Democrats stand firm in our conviction to protect the neutral foundation of popular education as an arena for learning and open dialogue.

In view of this, I would like to ask the Minister: How does the Minister intend to ensure that folkbildning continues to be a place for free formation of opinion? How shall the integrity of folkbildning be protected from political influence? Given the central role of folkbildning in our society, I wonder how the liberal Minister justifies the decision to create a gap between studieförbund and folkhögskolor, when both of these actors are so fundamental to our folkbildning.

(Applause)

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

Anna Wallentheim (S)

Mr. Speaker! I would like to thank my fellow Member of Parliament Linus Sköld for the fantastic interpellation and thank the Minister for the answer.

My colleagues have already explained in a meritorious way the greatness of popular education and also explained the concern that we Social Democrats feel regarding what is happening. Furthermore, after this interpellation debate, I will have the chance to debate my own interpellation with the minister, so I do not need to expend too much energy talking about how important popular education is. We will get the chance to do that very soon.

I would, however, like to emphasize once again that the 100 million that is being added next year is actually only one-fifth of what has already been cut from the folk high school. The fact that one wants to step in and reform the governance also affects education in a broad sense. In my world, it is therefore not entirely credible when the Minister for Education now, in his response, makes it sound as if the government is on the side of education and the folk high schools.

Folkbildningen has several purposes and creates new opportunities in life for many. This is a sentence that can be found on the government's own website, and it is words that I, of course, stand behind completely. Unfortunately, however, the government seems to be moving in the opposite direction, because the right-wing government's policy has already resulted in cuts of thousands of educational places. In times of economic uncertainty and instability, cuts and the will for political steering are an absurd but very clear signal from the government that they do not stand on the side of folkbildning.

The folk high school has always had a significant role in difficult times when people need to adapt to new circumstances. There are few forms of education that can act as quickly and flexibly when it comes to meeting society's needs as the folk high schools can, and this is thanks to their freedom.

Therefore, I would like to ask the Minister: Does the government believe that the reform that is now being reviewed can truly ensure the pillars of our strong folk education, which are based on free and voluntary folk education?

(Applause)

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

Isak From (S)

Mr. Speaker! As a Minister, you may notice the engagement regarding the issue. Thank you, Linus Sköld, for a very important interpellation!

Mr. Speaker! Much can be said about rural policy. It is not always here in the Swedish Parliament that we have succeeded fully. But a clear counterforce has been folkbildningen and the study associations and the study associations' presence in all 290 municipalities. It is a clear counterforce that is completely decisive for education and culture in many of the country's municipalities.

I shall read beforehand: "For the country's 158 rural municipalities, they are completely crucial - the proportion of participants in the age group 20-64 is nearly double that in the large cities, and in remote areas, it is a nearly four times larger proportion who engage in studies in circles. In Vilhelmina and Åsele, more than one third of the adults of working age participate, while the figure for affluent municipalities in Stockholm's northern suburbs does not exceed 4 percent. The highest participation in folkbildning is in the regions of Västerbotten, Gotland, Jämtland, Gävleborg and Jönköping."

It is not I who have written this, but it is actually Staffan Larsson, Andreas Fejes and Henrik Nordvall who are all three professors in adult pedagogy at Linköping University. Is it a coincidence that they highlight this?

I would like to ask, by reason of the interpellation on political governance, what it was that made the government take the drastic step to actually cut the support for the study associations, which are so important for all the country's rural municipalities. What was it that made a united government agree to this? What did one have to get to get the Sweden Democrats to agree? What was it that made the Liberals and Christian Democrats actually agree to this slaughter of the study associations?

(Applause)

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

Magnus Manhammar (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer and I truly thank Linus Sköld for the interpellation on this issue which really needs to be highlighted.

What I would like to highlight are the large and perhaps long-term consequences of what is described in the interpellation and in the response from the Minister for Education.

In the interpellation, the important question is posed as to how the Minister intends to act so that folkbildning's contribution to democracy and the free formation of opinion is not weakened in the reform that is currently taking place. To somehow analyze how important folkbildning is for Sweden, we can probably state that we probably would not have had democracy in Sweden if we had not had folkbildning. They belong together as two sides of the same coin, so a weakening of folkbildning in Sweden is also a weakening of our democracy.

In countries in the world that are dictatorships or in countries that do not have such a strong democracy, one can see that what one often measures democracy in, of course, is free elections. But that is usually only a small part of the whole. International research shows that the big question when it comes to whether different countries are democracies or not is that there is a strong civil society. A civil society has an association life with active associations and organizations that are free from the state and can act on their own based on democratic principles. It can be sports clubs, stamp clubs, political parties, or free mass media.

The lifeblood for civil society around the world, but also in Sweden, is precisely popular education. One must be able to receive support and influence. In order to constantly develop, democratize, and live, one simply needs to have this support.

It is therefore important not only that study associations receive support from the state and that there is a cooperation with the state so that civil society can live through study associations, but also that they are free from influence from the state, that is, that they manage themselves. We have an excellent model for this in Sweden with the Folkbildningsrådet.

I am becoming worried, and I know that there are many like me all around in the whole of Sweden who are worried about what is happening now as the Liberals carry out a serious attack against popular education and thereby civil society and thereby also Swedish democracy. And it is no small attack - popular education can suffer great damage from this.

The study associations are looking at what proportion of their activities run the risk of disappearing. Up to a third of all activities across the country will disappear, and several of the small municipalities will probably not even be able to maintain any adult education activities. There is no folk high school there, and the study associations will also have to shut down. They will take down the last sign with Vuxenskolan or ABF. Some municipalities are left completely alone without adult education.

It is clear that then the citizens in that municipality will likely become victims of fake news, incorrect facts, and other things that are spread, not least on social media. Education of the people has the effect of being able to be the counterforce to that.

How does the Minister for Education think about this? I am worried about the consequences of this for Swedish democracy in the long term. How does one intend to act in order to be able to strengthen democracy in some other way? Does one have any plan, or is this a cutback and a reforming without a consequence analysis? That is how I perceive it, and I perceive that there are very many more than I who perceive it that way in Sweden. This is something one does without having thought it through beforehand. One might not even be doing it of one's own free will. Then I wonder: Why is one doing this, and does one have any thought for instead strengthening Swedish democracy?

(Applause)

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

Utbildningsministern Mats Persson (L)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the interpellation and all the excellent contributions!

It is poetic to listen to the political consensus that exists regarding the importance of civil society in Sweden and that Sweden is so much more than the state, that Sweden is something more than what occurs within the framework of politics here in the Riksdag, in municipal councils or in regional councils.

Society Sweden is so much more. It is riding clubs, where often girls - all too often only girls - ride. It is football practice, which now attracts both young boys and young girls, not least after the women's national team's successes. It is piano lessons in the culture school's public activities but also piano lessons and singing lessons in voluntary activities, in some cases even driven by private companies. We have a broad sphere of activities that is civil society in Sweden and which is larger than the state, and it is poetic to hear that there is such a broad consensus in the Riksdag about the importance of that. For me, who grew up in the sports movement, this is lovely music to listen to.

Folkbildningen is a part of civil society. It is a part of the strong society, which is stronger than the state – that is at least what we want it to be – and an important part in democracy and an important part in society.

In this, the folk high schools play a very important role, not least. I really want to press on this and really emphasize the importance of the folk high schools when it comes to giving people a second chance. Thanks to the folk high schools, so many people who, after a somewhat turbulent school career or a school career in the regular school where they felt they didn't quite fit in, are given the opportunity for a second chance. One can study the general course at the folk high schools or take a more vocationally oriented education and in that way strengthen one's role in society, be included in society and get a second chance. It cannot be emphasized enough.

That is why the government prioritizes the folk high schools very much as part of the strong folk education. Now we are increasing the appropriations. It is an investment that means we are raising the level of funding that the folk high schools will have. It is not like before, where one temporarily gives a little money from one year to another to do something, but they receive larger appropriations long-term and permanently.

I was asked why we have divided it into two different appropriations. It is for that very reason – or it is for slightly different reasons, but one is that folk high schools and study associations partially or to a considerable extent have different characters in their activities. For example, the activities of folk high schools are in many cases CSN-eligible and a clear part of the education system, not least for giving people a second chance.

It is also because we in this way do not do what previous governments have done, where they have entered with temporary, targeted initiatives for various activities such that they, so to speak, tied the folk high schools or study associations to doing certain targeted things. We have wanted to maintain their possibility for voluntariness and to decide on this themselves. This gives increased freedom for the folk high schools to manage this.

I think that the investment the government is making in the folk high schools shows that we believe that popular education and education are important parts of our society and that we prioritize this very highly.

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Mr. Speaker! We have divided the appropriation for a few different reasons, says the minister. He states some different reasons but avoids the real reason, which is that this appropriation has been divided in order to be able to deliver the Sweden Democrats' order and slaughter the student unions.

According to their own calculations, 28 percent of the study associations' funding will disappear. 28 percent of the operations will cost with the budget presented by the government this autumn. It is an order from the Sverigedemokraterna.

I would also like to talk for a moment about the idea that this should be a way to prioritize the folk high schools.

A couple of weeks ago, I visited Älvsby folkhögskola. I live in Älvsbyn in Norrbotten. I visited the folkhögskola located where I live. Älvsbyn is a small town with a fairly small folkhögskola. The government's priorities have led to Älvsby folkhögskola having 1.7 million less in its budget this year than it had last year. That means 900 participant weeks. Translated into the number of people who can attend general courses or nursing education, which are the most common courses that Älvsby folkhögskola provides, it is approximately two classes.

This year, the government nominally allocates 100 million kronor, it claims. Then one can do the math. Since this appropriation has not existed previously, one must assume that it has been 100 million less than what is now in the appropriation for folk high schools. This corresponds to 2,346,000,000 for the current year and an increase of 100 million to 2,446,000,000 next year. If one were to index the 2.3 billion that applies to the current year and assume that we have an inflation of 4 percent—I would think that is conservatively calculated, but I have calculated it—the indexing means that one must add 94 million. If the money is to suffice for the same thing in 2024, one must add 94 million.

This means that the actual supplement to the folk high schools, which the government prioritizes, amounts to 6 million kronor in a grant that covers almost 2.5 billion. If that is the government's way of prioritizing, I would not want to be prioritized by the government.

How does this affect the activities of the study associations? It is the study associations that are in the crosshairs; it is the study associations that are to be slaughtered. 607,000, almost 608,000, unique participants took part in the study associations' activities in 2022. If you are to reduce that by 28 percent, it is 170,000 fewer who will be able to participate. Of the 607,000, almost 500,000 had short-term education. It is therefore those in society who have the greatest need of access to education who participate as unique participants in the study associations' activities, and it is these that the government is aiming at.

I think it is bordering on indecent to stand here and talk about Sweden being something more than the state and sing the praises of civil society and study associations in the way the minister does, when one does such things.

(Applause)

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

Gunilla Svantorp (S)

Mr. Speaker! This evening, the Transport Committee, where I sit, the Tech Alliance, met. They reminded us then of the home-PC reform, which we all remember, when we increased our skills by being able to rent a home-PC with the help of the union. But they also reminded us of how it happened – the folkbildning contributed by organizing study circles.

All study circles that contribute to increasing people's skills across our country are now threatened.

The Minister said: I do not want to make targeted interventions but rather provide permanent funds. This can be worthwhile, but I want to remind that reality does not stand still. Things happen that mean one might have to do things temporarily.

For example, I do not believe that our country would have managed the refugee crisis in 2015 without the contribution of folkbildning. In Värmland and Örebro, we were the first to request money for Svenska from day one, which we had already started without state funds. Eventually, the money for Svenska from day one arrived. It was a clear request from the sector itself, which the S- and MP-government actually listened to. It was very important for very many people that we received those funds.

I finally think, Mr. Speaker, that the view on study associations that the Minister expresses is problematic. If the activity entitles one to support from CSN, it concerns education, and then it is justifiable in some way—so that is how I interpreted what the Minister said. But folk education is about being able to grow as a human being and meeting people whom one otherwise would not meet. Why does L stand for opposing education?

(Applause)

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

Serkan Köse (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer! We can observe that it is somewhat distressing that the Minister wants to create a divide between study associations and folk high schools, when these actors are so fundamental to our folk education.

The Minister points out in his response to the National Audit Office's report. Admittedly, it can be stated that the National Audit Office's report indicates deficiencies in the study associations' fund management, but the government's hasty measures, obviously influenced by the Sweden Democrats, seem premature before the Liberals' own investigation, led by Christer Nylander, is complete. And despite these challenges, the Folkbildningsrådet has proactively presented solutions for improved transparency and quality, Mr. Speaker.

If we look at history, we can once again state that the Liberals have emphasized the invaluable role of education and highlighted popular education as the heart of Sweden's future. How, then, can the same liberal party today, in 2023, support initiatives that undermine this, while simultaneously prioritizing savings? Let me mock - the reduced plastic bag tax. That this tax is lowered at a cost of 500 million kronor, Mr. Speaker, in order, according to Oscar Sjöstedt, Sverigedemokraterna, "people are annoyed," puts things into perspective.

The Liberals, who are deeply rooted in the people's movement tradition, should look back and honor their origins.

Once again, what happens to a society when its citizens risk losing access to independent arenas for acquiring knowledge and reflection?

I would like to ask the Minister: How can the Minister ensure that public education remains protected from political interference and continues to serve its purpose as a place for free formation of opinion in the future? I would like to have answers to the questions.

(Applause)

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

Anna Wallentheim (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister for Education, for the answer!

The most expensive thing a country can do is to save on education and enlightenment. Enlightenment is a right, not a luxury. Popular education made me who I am. Popular education saves lives. Creative people change the world. Popular education is a wealth for everyone in Sweden. We learn together. A blow against popular education is a blow against democracy and Sweden.

This is just a selection of the messages on all the signs that were present at Sergels torg on Tuesday, September 19, during the demonstration for folk education and the folk high schools organized by Sveriges Lärare Folkhögskola. I know it, because I was there and was part of the demonstration. I got to speak with representatives from some of the folk high schools that were there and listen to the fantastic speeches that were given.

I therefore feel concern after the Minister's answer, especially regarding what my colleagues have raised – that a distinction is being made between folk high schools and study associations. My view is, however, that folk high schools support study associations and study associations support folk high schools. Popular education exists because we have both of these parts.

I wonder therefore: What is the Minister's answer to all those people who are feeling anxious right now, all those people across Sweden who were out together on September 19 and stood up for the education of the people?

(Applause)

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

Isak From (S)

Mr. Speaker and Minister! Education is dangerous for the Sweden Democrats. That is probably why they have continuously had to include cuts in their budget motions. It is tragic to see that this is now also present in the government's budget proposal.

Sweden is so much more, says Mats Persson. Yes, it is. That is why what the government is doing now becomes so absurd, so contradictory and so incomprehensible.

Mats Persson claims that this is an investment. When we are out and meeting the folk high schools, we hear that they do not see it as an investment. They see it as a cut of 400 million and many thousands of study hours. They also see the government's division of folk education as harmful. Out in the country, there is an established, long-standing cooperation between folk high schools and study associations, especially in rural areas and in the countryside.

When we met representatives from Strömbäck's folkhögskola in Västerbotten, they meant that with this budget they can manage a closure of the folkhögskola. Then one may have succeeded; then one has cut off another leg.

Mr. Speaker! I received no answer. How has the government intended to think and prioritize regarding the importance of the study associations in rural and countryside municipalities?

(Applause)

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

Magnus Manhammar (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer, and thank you once again, Linus, for that we have this discussion and this important debate!

I am pleased with the Minister's answer. I think it was pleasant and filled with hope. But I did not quite get an answer to what I wanted an answer to. I hope that I can get it to a greater extent after this.

The big difference between democracies like Sweden and dictatorships like Russia is namely that one lacks a civil society in Russia. There is a civil society that fights against the wind, which we to some extent from Sweden's side have supported but which is incredibly suppressed. People's education, association activists and others are persecuted and imprisoned. People's education and civil society are incredibly weak.

What needs to be done is exactly the same as what I myself have been involved in doing in Russia before the war, namely to work to strengthen civil society. I know that folk high schools and study associations work to strengthen civil society and study associations in Ukraine, to strengthen democracy, resilience against Russia's fake news, and the resistance against Russia's incredible attack, both informatively and militarily, against Ukraine. Supporting civil society is an important part.

I know that some of our colleagues here in the chamber, in conversations with an international organization such as Nato, have been told that one of the most important things that Sweden brings into Nato if we now become members is that we have a strong civil society. We have a strong resilience against precisely fake news. We have a strong tradition of democracy. The study associations are absolutely crucial in this, together with the folk high schools.

I looked at the figures during the break here. I checked that there are folk high schools in 152 municipalities around the country. We have a total of 290 municipalities, so there are many municipalities where they do not exist and where study associations fill this function. When study associations now risk disappearing, what will be the consequence? I would like to hear how the Minister for Education thinks about this.

(Applause)

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

Utbildningsministern Mats Persson (L)

Mr. Speaker! I will begin by directly responding to Magnus Manhammar's excellent contribution. I completely share the view that civil society is an important part of democracy and that societies that are not as strong as the Swedish one often lack precisely this. Russia, as the member mentions, is unfortunately an excellent example of this. Sweden must never go in that direction, but rather we shall go in the opposite direction.

Mr. Speaker! Let me delve a bit deeper into this matter regarding the folk high schools and shared grants. I may have been a bit unclear there. I and the government have no objection to temporary commitments or to the government giving temporary assignments to folk high schools or study associations. I share the view that the study associations have been a great strength, not least during the recent refugee crisis, that is to say the war in Ukraine. There, they have played an incredibly important role, and they have a strong ability to quickly arrange activities. In this case, it has been about study circles or activities that give Ukrainians the opportunity to learn Swedish. I completely share that view.

But with that said, it is still the case with today's regulations that if the government wants to give the folk high schools a permanently increased appropriation, it is not possible. Before the amendment in the proposal that is now on the Riksdag's table has been implemented, it is a combined appropriation. Now, from the government's side, we want to split it into two different appropriations in order to be able to permanently increase the appropriations to the folk high schools.

It would naturally have been possible for the government to move forward with a temporary investment in the folk high schools and specify a certain direction for the money, but this is not the government's ambition here. The government's ambition is a permanent increase and to take advantage of the power that lies in the voluntariness and the freedom for the folk high schools to solve this themselves.

This is, therefore, an investment. It concerns a permanent increase of 100 million kronor in appropriations compared to what has been signaled in previous budgets.

Mr. Speaker! The Government is making very clear priorities. We prioritize education very highly. An important part of this is that we will now have nearly 20,000 more places in vocational training both within the framework of komvux and within the framework of yrkeshögskolan. It is an important priority that we are making, and we are doing it in a situation where we have a tough economic situation and need to have restrained budgets so that inflation does not spiral out of control.

Everyone in society - everyone who today sits at home and eats dinner with their family - wonders which expenses they should cut and what priorities they should make in their household budget. In the same way, the government needs to reflect, act, and make priorities in the budget. In this precarious economic situation, the government has chosen to prioritize education highly, not least the activities of the folk high schools. We believe that they play an important role in giving people a second chance and create opportunities for people to enter the labor market.

We are not setting this against other activities, but civil society, where popular education is an important part, continues to play a very important role in Swedish society.

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Mr. Speaker! The claim that there will be 20,000 more places in komvux next year is not true.

Every time the government speaks about the budget, Elisabeth Svantesson's most important word is "inflation fighting." That is the most important thing. Acknowledge the inflation! Even if there is a small nominal increase in the appropriation level from the current year to the next, it does not mean that the money is sufficient for more educational places, on the contrary. I have done the math, and the Minister for Education should also do so.

This also applies to the so-called initiative for the folk high schools. As I said, the total increase will amount to 6 million, after last year's reduction of 500 million. Älvsby folkhögskola still has 1.7 million less in annual budget after this. It is 24 students who will not receive instruction in general courses.

I still think it is cheeky of the Minister for Education to stand here and sing the praises of civil society while simultaneously wanting to dismantle the activities of the study associations. A third is to be cut. To claim that it is about permanent grant increases for the folk high schools is just nonsense!

The Minister is making permanent, large cuts to the activities of the study associations. That is what this is about. It is a commissioned job from the Sverigedemokraterna. The Minister does not decide for himself which policy he should pursue, because if he did, he would have done what his voters advocate, what the Liberals' own educational association advocates, and what the majority of the referral bodies advocate. Then he would not have shifted the political positions to steer the content of education and not slaughtered the study associations. It is Sverigedemokratisk policy.

(cont.)

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