Response to interpellation 2023/24:581 on cuts in the country's schools

Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)

have asked me what I intend to do to stop the cuts to the country's schools.

The government's priority is the school. The Swedish preschool and school are in a difficult situation with strongly increased costs for goods, services, and wages. The government therefore added approximately 1.2 billion kronor to the school for 2024. The government has, among other things, reinforced the knowledge grant by 850 million kronor, and the grant now amounts to 7.5 billion kronor. The idea is that the state grant shall, among other things, be able to be used to implement early support measures. The state's contribution to the school in the budget for 2024 is the largest in 20 years measured in current prices and is expected to be the third largest during the same period in fixed prices.

These reinforcements will contribute to alleviating the difficult economic situation that many preschools and schools are in, but the situation also requires that the municipalities take their responsibility. To support the municipal sector, the government also reinforced the general state grants to municipalities and regions with 10 billion kronor for 2024, of which 7 billion kronor are distributed to the municipalities. The reinforcement of the general state grants corresponds to a quarter of the total reform space in the budget. The share of the state budget that goes to the school and the state contribution to the school measured as a share of GDP 2024 are also some of the largest contributions from the state ever.

The Government has appointed the investigation A national school funding norm for increased equality (U 2023:05), which is to propose a system for resource distribution based on a nationally binding school funding norm. Today, there are large differences in how much different municipalities invest in schools and deficiencies in how resources are distributed to independent schools.

The government is making large budget investments in schools, some of which have been described here, and is following the economic development closely. All children and students shall get a good start in life.

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

Åsa Westlund (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer. I have asked the Minister what she intends to do to stop the cuts occurring at schools across the country. I perceived no answer to this, but rather the answer was about what the government has done in its budget, that is to say, nothing that leads forward.

We are now seeing the results of the government's budget all around the country. We see it on local news, in outraged Facebook groups, and in the surveys that the trade unions have conducted among their members. They clearly testify that cuts are being made on the majority of the country's schools. Cuts are being made on student assistants. Cuts are being made on special support. Cuts are being made by merging classes, and cuts are being made in every possible way.

This is, of course, not the way forward for a knowledge nation like Sweden, which is to compete with knowledge and competence with the rest of the world. And it is not the way forward for a nation that already today knocks out between 15 and 17 percent of the students attending primary school who do not receive passing grades and thus do not become eligible for a national program. Already today we see a large such knock-out, and what all teachers and other employees within the school testify to is that the support for precisely those students who need a little extra disappears with the government's policy.

The government took over power in a cost crisis, but it was boasted that they were investing heavily in schools. There were record investments in the first budget, but upon closer inspection, it turned out that what they actually did was cut the school budget by 2 billion in constant prices. For the country's schools, there were 3,000 fewer teachers with this government's budget in the first year than there were for the country's schools during the Social Democratic government's last years.

The development has continued. It is not the case that the government has repaired the damage, rather the cut remains - and it is that which has real effects all around the country.

Many of the government's representatives have pointed out that the municipalities have a responsibility, and they do, of course. But municipalities do not have the tools to counter such large inflation crises as we have experienced, but it is the state that has those muscles and those tools in its hand. Then one must step in and support municipalities and regions and thereby the welfare of which the school constitutes an important part.

We Social Democrats have shown at every step in the process that we can prioritize differently. We have put more into school and education, and we have put more than the government into general state grants to prevent those types of cuts. Furthermore, we have done this by saying no to, or not prioritizing, large tax cuts. It is the government's big investment: in every budget, the big investment is tax cuts. In the first budget, the choice was made to give 12 billion in tax cuts for those who earn the most, while the school received 2 billion less in constant prices.

It is a conscious prioritization, and I regret it. It makes Sweden as a country weaker. But I still want to ask the question again: What will the government do to counteract the cuts we are now seeing in Swedish schools across the country?

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

Paula Örn (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer to Åsa Westlund's important question.

Perhaps one as a politician in opposition should give special thanks for such a tone-deaf response. The Minister for Education repeats her and the government's mantra about the largest contributions ever. The problem for Lotta Edholm is that the country's teachers, parents, and students are neither blind nor deaf. They now see what is happening in the Swedish school, and what is happening today are cuts in resources and reductions in staff in the vast majority of municipalities.

When the map and reality do not align, the minister and government colleagues, together with the Sweden Democrats, take an increasingly firm grip on the map: It is the municipalities that are not prioritizing. It should have been done differently, and indeed, investments have been made, and so on.

But people understand. They see their own economic development where this year's salary in itself is the highest ever, but the problem is that the cost development for ordinary people far exceeds this year's historically high salary. The rent and the interest have risen sharply, and food prices are not far behind. Most people have therefore received a so-called real wage cut. Most people understand that.

They also understand that the country's municipalities are also affected by the same real wage reduction as they themselves. Furthermore, they see that the government does not care about addressing the cost crisis that we now see spreading across the country's schools, that is, that the cost increases far exceed the potentially increased revenues. In the Gothenburg municipality, for example, the rental costs only increased by almost 200 million ahead of 2024.

In my own home municipality, Ale, we see significant reductions in the number of adults in schools, not primarily of permanent teachers but often of the so important staff around them – those who are supposed to relieve the teachers, in order to support the students who have it extra tough. It is student assistants, leisure leaders, and school caretakers who are being cut. It is a development we see in an incredibly large number of municipalities. The already tough working environment for Sweden's teachers is being severely worsened.

The Minister will probably be better off saying that the teacher density has not decreased; it was probably only the Social Democrats who cried wolf. But I am convinced that teachers and parents see the reality that involves cuts and deteriorations in the school, even when the municipalities do their utmost to protect teachers' employment.

I want to ask the Minister for Education how she would like to describe the reality in the country's schools. I have made a brief description of the reality that we Social Democrats see and that we hear the country's teachers testify about. But how does the Minister for Education describe the situation in the country's schools? Does the Minister see a reality where the schools, thanks to the government's increased resources, as she says in the answer, can invest and increase the availability of, for example, early support measures? Or does she see that in reality, the support measures are being reduced or disappearing entirely in the vast majority of schools?

(Applause)

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

Rose-Marie Carlsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Across the country, preschools, schools, and after-school activities are being hit by cuts. Sveriges Lärare has asked its members how the government's budget affects their operations. 60 percent stated that during 2023 and 2024, cuts are being implemented, or will be implemented, at their school or preschool. Kommunal has also sent out a survey among its workplace representatives within the same operations and also within after-school activities. Half state that cuts have been made, or are expected, during this year.

Costs are increasing faster than revenues are, while at the same time most municipalities have signaled a decreased number of children. Looking a few years ahead, the birth cohorts will increase again, but because the economy looks the way it does today, one cannot have the foresight one would wish for.

When it comes to preschool and childcare, 56 percent of the municipalities announce savings in these activities. Now that the number of children is decreasing, it is an absolutely excellent opportunity for the municipalities to reduce the size of the children's groups, but the economy makes it almost impossible. The state grants have gone from constituting half of the municipalities' revenues to constituting a third. In other words, the municipalities have to take a larger piece of the cake of what they are required to do. Then the minister says that the municipalities may prioritize.

In the survey that Kommunal sent out, it appears that municipalities have introduced purchase bans, and the staff describe that they have to buy materials with their own money and prepare crafts at home. The snack times have been scrapped, and so on.

There is some small municipality that is pausing its OB-care to save 68,000 kronor. Then one can ask how the competence supply will be managed further ahead, and even now within elderly care and healthcare. One municipality thinks that one has too high a proportion of preschool teachers because it costs to have preschool teachers employed. They offer all preschool teachers six months' wages if they resign, so the municipality avoids having to dismiss them and following the LAS-list.

A municipality thinks it is important that five-year-olds should be in preschool for more hours than the statutory 15 hours a week, and therefore offers 25 hours. But now they are going back to 15 hours because they do not have the possibility to offer more. At the same time, they are lowering the childcare subsidy by 2 percent.

The list can be as long as it wants when it comes to how it will look within the different school forms. What is highlighted by both associations is that they are concerned and express that there are difficulties in living up to the goals in the curriculum that has been adopted here in the chamber and which the municipalities are obliged to live up to. The Swedish Schools Inspectorate reviews how they live up to the curriculum's goals, but I do not believe that municipalities can invoke lack of resources as a reason for not living up to the curriculum's goals.

My question to the Minister is therefore: How does the Minister intend to ensure that the municipalities receive the funds they need so that they can manage to live up to the goals of the curriculum in the different school forms?

(Applause)

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Madam Speaker! Earlier today, Lotta Edholm and I were at the same seminar, organized by Sveriges Lärare, which today is releasing a report on how teachers perceive the situation regarding extra adaptations and special support.

It can be noted that between 65 and 77 percent of the responding teachers in Sveriges Lärares survey say that at their school, there are resources to a low or very low degree to meet the requirements of the Education Act when it comes to extra adaptations and special support. About 70 percent of the teachers are therefore saying that the resources are insufficient to meet the requirements of the Education Act. Let that figure sink in!

Lotta Edholm says that the government added 1.2 billion kronor to the school for 2024 and that the government's priority is the school. It is approximately the same amount as the tax reduction was increased by for those who luxury-renovate their kitchen.

I will also take an example from reality. I am also a local politician in Älvsbyn municipality. Älvsbyn is a fairly small municipality in Norrbotten, on the border of the inland. It has 8,000 inhabitants and a total school budget from preschool to adult education that amounts to 184 million kronor. For 2023 and 2024, the cut, i.e., the savings requirement, on the operations is 5.1 million, which corresponds to approximately 2.7 percent. If one takes the 184 million and runs them through the price calculator at SCB, they suddenly are not worth more than 165 million. In addition to the 2.7 percent, one therefore needs to add a value erosion of 10 percent of the budget space, and the savings therefore become almost 13 percent over two years.

This, Madam Speaker, is the result of the government's policy. This is the result of the government not increasing the state grants, whether those directed at the school or the general ones, by what inflation requires. The result, thus what it boils down to in the operations, is, for example, that staff must be laid off in the adapted primary school in Älvsbyn and that the upper secondary school must merge and teach in larger groups or share resources with adult education to a much greater extent.

Lotta Edholm referred to the investigation A national school voucher norm. Yes, the National Audit Office has stated that the school voucher model is an incredibly inefficient use of the existing resources in the school. There are already prepared proposals on Lotta Edholm's desk to change the school voucher so that we can achieve a more efficient use of resources and reduce the leakage in the form of profit that disappears into private shareholder pockets. These are resources that could have eased the situation in a situation like this.

I think that Lotta Edholm is still responsible for the answer to the question in the interpellation, i.e., what she is going to do to stop the cuts in the country's schools. If the answer is that the government's priority is the school, I would not want to be prioritized by this government.

(Applause)

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

Hanna Westerén (S)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by thanking the interpellor Åsa Westlund for the opportunity to debate the issue of the cost crisis in schools. It is an issue that touches me deeply.

My first local government assignment was as a substitute in the Children and Education Committee back home in Gotland, and I can truly empathize with the predicament that elected officials in children and education committees across Sweden's municipalities feel now that costs are skyrocketing and the SD government is looking at them.

For us Social Democrats, education and schooling are fundamental to our view on how we build a strong society. Through education, we release people's inherent potential and strengths. It may sound a bit worn out, but it is also by building educated, secure children that we can prevent the repairing of broken adults with incomplete grades and tangled school careers.

At my home on Gotland, the cost crisis is incredibly palpable. There is an imminent risk that exactly what is not supposed to happen will happen anyway, namely that the compensatory mission - this extremely important mission - will be cut short when the SD government forces Swedish municipalities to their knees.

Just because we all have such different prerequisites in terms of background, educational tradition, and functional variation, the responsibility falls heavily on the schools to offer opportunities for everyone to catch up and keep up, and to meet the students where they are. This requires special teaching groups, adapted primary school, and - in their own way, such as at my home - a relatively dispersed school organization in a small area.

Swedish school is not perfect, but it is nonetheless among the most important things we have for building the strong welfare state. That the Sverigedemokratiskt-led government so lightly ventures into Swedish school is irresponsible, and this will cost us all very much for a long time.

This also rhymes extra poorly considering that the SD government has an alleged focus on crime fighting. The best vaccine in the world against ending up on the streets is a completed schooling. That crime prevention work is, in some parts, in the simplest terms, about providing improved life chances. It is in the school that this happens.

Conducting education in Sweden's only island region is challenging. Our opportunities to have efficient cooperation with other municipalities are limited for natural reasons. Nevertheless, teachers, principals, and other school staff fulfill the mission in an outstanding way every day, and I am immensely proud of the Gotlandic school. I am myself a product of it and have been involved in making decisions about it, but I also know that, in its own way, for quite a long time it has been net-neutral – just barely.

We are incredibly lucky to have teachers who continue to go to work, who continue to work in the Gotlandic school system and who do not change municipalities or jobs. Our opportunities here on Gotland to continue to offer attractive working conditions and an attractive workplace at all, so that teachers can be their best selves in the classroom, are strongly challenged by the skyrocketing cost crisis. It is at the expense of the Sweden Democrat's government holding that this occurs.

I honestly do not understand how Swedish schools can continue to deliver under these premises.

(Applause)

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

Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)

Madam Speaker! I take these questions most seriously. We have major economic problems in Sweden, among others within the public sector but naturally also among individual individuals, and we have had that for some time now. That is why the government is making major investments in the school system.

It is, however, important to remember that it is a shared responsibility. It cannot be only the state that makes investments, but the municipalities must also be able to meet the needs that exist, given that we have a municipalized school system.

Åsa Westlund said something along the lines that the municipalities do not have tools to counter the problems. No, well, that is exactly how it is. We have a school system where small municipalities many times have very difficulties in just countering the problems. My answer to that problem is a national school funding norm, that is to say a norm that the municipalities cannot go below.

How much money the municipalities actually invest in their schools varies very greatly today. There is a difference of approximately 70,000 kronor per pupil per year between the municipality that invests the most and the one that invests the least. 70,000 kronor is quite a lot of money. For half of the 70,000, there are objective explanations. One can have large costs for school transport, large socio-economic challenges, long distances, and so on. But when it comes to the other half, no one knows. Probably, the municipalities that chose to invest a little in their school when the school was municipalized have continued to do so.

We must get this right. The school system is of national importance and cannot be decided in the way it is today. I am completely convinced that we need to have stronger state governance. But until then, we need to invest in schools from the state level but also from the municipalities themselves. That is why the government has made the investments that I mentioned in my first answer. I will, of course, be able to answer more questions about that.

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

Åsa Westlund (S)

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

What I was trying to say before was that we in this country have budget rules that mean that Sweden's municipalities and regions have a balance requirement, which the state does not have. The state can adjust its budget in a completely different way based on a very large cost crisis or, for that matter, another societal crisis, such as corona.

That is what we Social Democrats did, actually partly together with the Liberals, when we held government power. The state stepped in with large resources to support society, to ensure that healthcare would function and, for that part, that the country's schools could offer the students who were in school at that time good quality.

Now we have a completely different crisis in the country: a cost crisis. It strikes directly at Swedish welfare. It affects the students here and now. They will never get back their school time. It is here and now.

The idea behind the economic system, the budget rules, which we have in Sweden, is that the state should step in and cover the large cost increase that municipalities and regions are now seeing. But that is not what this government is doing.

I heard the Minister again standing and talking about how municipalities prioritize poorly, that some municipalities prioritize the school too little. Then I want to remind again of the government's own prioritization. That is what we are discussing here in the chamber of the Riksdag today.

What is the government's own priority? It is tax cuts. In the government's first budget, 12 billion went to those who earn the most, while funding for schools from the state was cut by 2 billion in constant prices. That is the government's priority. That they then stand there and point fingers and say that municipalities prioritize poorly, I find embarrassing.

The same applies to the budget that we are currently living with. Linus Sköld pointed out here earlier – and it is true – that luxury-rot for those who renovate their kitchen for over 600,000 kronor in the middle of a cost crisis receives the government's support. The government thinks that they are the ones who need support. Almost as much money is spent there as is spent on Swedish school in a budget initiative. I think it is terrible.

I would like to tell you about a number of things happening in municipalities in my constituency. There, it is seen that people are being laid off. In Botkyrka, a municipality in the Stockholm region with very large challenges, social pedagogues, teacher assistants, and childcare workers are now being laid off. And they are not temporary employees. They are, in fact, already gone. That is how tough it is in that municipality.

In Österåker, a certainly prosperous municipality, the small and special teaching groups risk disappearing. Perhaps even worse is that the school costs will increase and become gigantic, because a new friskola is to be enticed to establish itself in the municipality.

In Nacka, we see that classes are being merged; more students are to go in the same class. And for example, they do not rent sports halls but instead let the students have sports outdoors during the whole year. Those are a few examples.

The school is facing a double cost crisis, and the government is failing the school twice over. On one hand, since taking office, they have cut fixed prices on the state funding of the school, and on the other, they are not stopping the overcompensation to the independent schools (friskolorna). This causes the municipalities' resources to be drained even further and disappear toward waffle stands, beach plots, and other things. These are funds that would have been needed within the school.

(Applause)

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

Paula Örn (S)

Mr. Speaker! We continue the discussion on the economic situation in the municipalities. I want to refer to SKR's latest economic report from last autumn. It is projected that the total deficit for Sweden's municipalities in 2024 points towards approximately 7 billion kronor - in deficit. So, it is not about good economic management with 2 percent in profit and so on, but 7 billion in deficit. The school can be roughly said to constitute approximately half of the municipal budget. That alone should make Lotta Edholm understand the seriousness.

One can ask why it is children and pupils in schools who are now to pay the price for the inflation crisis caused by the Russian war of aggression in Ukraine. Why does this government not consider that the state must take greater responsibility for these massive cost increases which lie completely outside the municipalities' control?

I want to highlight the latest world event that heavily affected the municipalities' finances: the pandemic. The then social democratically led government ensured that the municipalities were compensated for the cost increases as far as was possible. During the pandemic, I did not hear any liberal politicians standing and, as Lotta Edholm is doing now, demanding that the municipalities should take their responsibility. Why does one think that costs caused by a global pandemic should be compensated to a greater extent than costs caused by a global inflation crisis?

Finally: Why does the Minister for Education not seem to think at all that the cost crisis in Swedish schools is something that she and the government should take responsibility for?

(Applause)

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

Rose-Marie Carlsson (S)

Mr. Speaker! Regardless of what the Minister says, the fact remains: the municipalities must bear a larger share of the cake than before. I am thinking of the state grant for quality-enhancing measures in preschool, which the previous government introduced and which has been continued. How those funds could be used was welcomed out in the municipalities.

But when I now speak with municipalities, I hear that they are worried, because they can read out that reductions are being signaled in this and in the maximum fee. The consequences will then be double for the municipalities. It is both reduced child allowances and eroded state grants.

The state grant for the quality-enhancing measures was, as mentioned, welcomed by the municipalities, and many municipalities invested in making a long-term plan. But can it be relied upon that one can continue with what has been started?

Often, state grants are distributed within the operations, and one does the same thing as before. But now many municipalities, including my own home municipality Malmö, were given the opportunity to both distribute money generally and to review whether they should do something else to see if it could be better than doing more of the same thing. There is a concern that one will not be able to continue with this if the announced cuts are made.

I am thinking about the 800 million that the previous government added in connection with the introduction of benchmarks for the size of children's groups. That was put into the quality-enhancing measures. Now those 800 million are going to disappear. That is something one is very worried about.

My question is, besides how one is to live up to the remaining curriculum goals, how the municipalities are to dare to make investments or continue with the long-term investments they have already started when one can already now expect cuts in the state grants.

(Applause)

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Mr. Speaker! The consequences of the government's policies and priorities are clear. As Paula Örn pointed out, a deficit of 7 billion is projected for the municipalities, in total. One in three municipalities budgets with a deficit. At the same time, we see the largest municipal tax increases since the Alliance has been in power. These are the consequences of the state's underfunding.

The state's largest individual expenditure is general government grants to regions and municipalities. When these are not increased, it has dramatic consequences for the municipalities' ability to finance the welfare. Municipalities must either budget with a deficit - run with a deficit despite having tried to balance their budget - or raise taxes.

When the government lowers the tax on renovating the kitchen or on the most wealthy incomes, the municipalities have to raise the tax for all income earners. So it is connected. The consequences for the schools in Älvsbyn municipality mean cuts of 13 percent of the operations over two years. I would like to ask Lotta Edholm if these are the intended consequences. Was it what Lotta Edholm wanted – that the school in Älvsbyn would be forced to save 13 percent – when she said she would make historical investments in the school?

(Applause)

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

Hanna Westerén (S)

Mr. Speaker! Much has been said. I wondered whether we have made any progress through this debate. My conviction has at least been strengthened: We must continue to point out how grave the cost crisis is in Swedish schools. Given the answers, or perhaps rather the missing answers today, we must continue to emphasize how bad it is in our Swedish municipalities. It is a cost crisis of great proportions, and it is ongoing at this very moment.

Today, for example, my party colleagues and politicians of other colors are sitting at home on Gotland and sweating at the board meeting. They are obviously proud of the trust they have received to decide on Gotlandic school, but incredibly sweaty over how they will manage to deliver on one of the welfare state's most important missions: an educated and trained population.

I am aware that the SD government has no new announcements to give to everyone affected by Swedish school. We are quite many. It is students, parents of students, teachers, staff - in short all of us who see school as the foundation for things to go well for Sweden.

The Minister says that the government is making historically large investments in schools, but it is also a historically large test. I am myself a child of the 90s crisis. We paid off those debts for a long time, and some are still paying.

The Minister says that Swedish municipalities should take their share of the responsibility, and I think that is unreasonable. When is the government going to take its share of the responsibility, and how is the Swedish school system supposed to be able to deliver on these premises?

(Applause)

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

Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)

Mr. Speaker! The Government takes the situation most seriously. We are investing, for example, 850 million more through the knowledge grant for better knowledge development in Swedish schools. In addition to all targeted state grants, the municipalities receive support through the general state grants. It is thus the large state grants. The municipalities are free to use them in the way they find best. The government has strengthened the general state grants, which I have tried to describe in previous remarks. We also see that that strengthening will, naturally, come to the benefit of Swedish students and children.

In addition to the targeted and general government grants, we are trying to facilitate for the municipalities to apply for the government grants that exist. We have merged government grants and tried to simplify the regulatory framework so that it will be easier for the municipalities to apply for them. That development will continue. We do not want government grants that are so complicated to apply for that the municipalities refrain from doing so. Examples of government grants that are easy to apply for are government grants for teaching materials and for fiction for school libraries.

We are, therefore, working on both fronts simultaneously. It is both about increasing the state's investments in schools and about trying to simplify for the municipalities to apply for the state grants that exist.

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

Åsa Westlund (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer! I got the feeling that the Minister is using the opposite language.

When the government says that they are investing in the school, they are cutting back in terms of fixed prices. It results in fewer teachers and less money for what is needed in Swedish schools.

When the government says that they want fewer targeted state grants, they actually mean that they are establishing more, because that is what they have done. It has become more complicated for the municipalities to get the money for the school that they receive anyway.

When the government says that they prioritize the school, they do not prioritize the school, but instead tax cuts - and mostly tax cuts for those who earn the most. That is the government's overall priority. It is visible in every budget table, and it is also visible when the Finance Minister speaks in the media.

Since I have not received any information about new money, I assume that there are no new funds in the government's spring budget so far, but there really should be. The Finance Minister has said that she envisions tax cuts. I hope that the Education Minister can fight for Swedish schools and stand up for the fact that they need the money available in the state treasury to improve Sweden's future.

If nothing else helps, I have a suggestion for an argument. It does not seem to be sufficient to say that students in Swedish schools today have the same right to a good school as those who attended four or five years ago. It does not seem to be enough as an argument for the government to invest properly in schools, but it perhaps can be an argument to ask what happens to the students who today do not receive support in school. What happens when gang criminals lure with a different future when young people are knocked out because they do not receive the support they need due to the government's cuts? Use that argument!

(Applause)

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

Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)

Mr. Speaker! In this discussion, I have tried to present two different lines. We are making major investments from the state side for the municipalities, both through the general state grants and through the targeted state grants. We are also trying to simplify and merge state grants. One such example is the one Rose-Marie Carlsson mentioned: The state grants for improved quality in preschool have been merged into one state grant.

It is also important to have a discussion on how we are to solve the problems in the long term regarding the very large differences in how much money the municipalities invest in our schools. These differences mean that school is not equal in Sweden today. If we continue to invest large sums of money, the differences will still persist if we do not do something more radical. By something more radical, I mean a national school funding norm that the municipalities cannot fall below. I am convinced that we need more state governance of Swedish school, because school is a national responsibility and not just a responsibility for each individual municipality.

Thank you for the debate!

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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