Response to interpellation 2023/24:615 on the funding of UWC in Norway
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the government's decision to no longer contribute to the funding of United World College Red Cross Nordic in Norway. M argues that Swedish aid is limited and that it is necessary to prioritize strictly in a world with extensive needs 1 2. M emphasizes that the funds should instead go to important purposes such as support for Ukraine and increased humanitarian aid 2 3. C regrets the decision and argues that the school is a unique place to spread democratic values and Nordic values 4 5. C highlights that the cost is small in relation to the aid budget 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.
Statsrådet Johan Forssell (M)
Madam Speaker! Catarina Deremar has asked me if I am prepared to reassess the previous position that Sweden will no longer contribute to the funding of United World College Red Cross Nordic.
Swedish aid is generous but not infinite. In a world with extensive needs where the funding gap is growing, it is necessary to prioritize. It is not feasible to resume the Swedish support to United World College in Norway.
Sweden's decision is not a reflection of the school's performance or importance, or of Sweden's commitment to the highly valued Nordic cooperation. It is a consequence of difficult trade-offs and the need for strict prioritizations.
Catarina Deremar (C)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer to my interpellation!
I must begin by saying that I really appreciate the clear answer that the Minister has given to my question. But as you understand, I naturally regret the answer itself. My hope was, after all, that I would receive a positive answer from the Minister and that the government would reconsider its previous position.
I understand that one must make strict prioritizations both when it comes to our Swedish aid and in other issues, and that we send aid money to an operation in Norway can indeed make one raise an eyebrow. But UWC Red Cross Nordic has a special history.
The school was formed in 1995 through an agreement between Denmark, Norway and Sweden - a Nordic cooperation. United World College is located at 18 sites across four continents. Over 150 countries are represented among the approximately 9,500 students. Students from Sweden have the opportunity to attend their second and third years of upper secondary school there, and it is preparatory for higher studies.
As a co-founder, Sweden was a co-financer of UWC Red Cross Nordic, which is otherwise located in a most delightful place in Flekke in Fjaler in Norway. Here, one learns about democracy - we spread our Nordic values.
I visited the school in May last year together with my party colleague from the Storting, Kathrine Kleveland. We were met by 200 students from 91 countries. 30 percent of the students come from the Nordic region. It is a unique place to spread fundamental democratic values, and the students who attend there are destined to be future leaders and role models in their home regions.
I wonder a bit what it was that caused the Swedish government to cut this funding. How did they come to that conclusion? It has undeniably put the school in a difficult financial situation.
Statsrådet Johan Forssell (M)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Catarina Deremar, for the interpellation!
I am glad that Catarina Deremar appreciates the rigor of the answer, even though I understand that, in terms of content, it was not the answer she had hoped for.
It is the case that this school, just as the interpellator describes, was founded 30 years ago. Sweden has been a financier of it. We have not been the largest. In relation to Norway, where the school is located, we have been a rather small financier. But over the last five years, we have nevertheless given 35 million kronor in total. Norway has given many times more.
It is clear that aid policy is associated with difficult trade-offs. We see enormous needs in the world. We see very large needs, not least in our own immediate vicinity, in Ukraine. We have a new situation with the terrible war that is ongoing following Russia's attempt at a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
We also see extensive humanitarian needs, partly in places that a few years ago did not have that type of problem.
It is clear that in the difficult environment and with the fact that needs are increasing, we have had to make decisions that we perhaps would have wished we did not have to make and which were difficult. But pluses and minuses must balance out if we are to be able to meet the priorities we have. It is, for example, a powerful and sustained support to Ukraine and being able to increase the humanitarian support - or for that matter the support to democracy fighters around the world. That is also a clear priority for the government.
I just want to confirm what I said in my answer. This is not an assessment of the school's important activities, on the contrary. We see that it has been able to contribute very important perspectives. It also operates in an area where Sweden is active. It is not solely about this school, but if one looks at this more broadly, one sees that we have different types of collaborations and assistance. We will continue to be there.
But unfortunately, again with the risk of not giving the answer the interpellator wants - if one is to have all these priorities met, one must sometimes make decisions that mean one cannot continue with the things one has done previously, even if one has done them for up to 30 years. Therefore, I cannot say that it is currently relevant to resume the support. We will of course continue to look at the aid in this area, and I naturally also have contact with my Norwegian colleague regarding this. Roughly there we stand today.
Catarina Deremar (C)
Madam Speaker! Thank you again, Minister, for the answer! I believe we agree on many things. There are immense challenges in the world.
What I think is so unique and still want to hold onto is that here, young people gather who get to learn, above all, about peace and a democratic approach with our Nordic values as a foundation. They apply, and it is national committees that admit the students. They ensure that they have special prerequisites to manage this school and also want to make the world better.
The Nordic Council's vision is that the Nordic region should be the world's most sustainable integrated region by 2030. I believe that UWC Red Cross Nordic is a good tool for that vision to be fulfilled.
I have noted that the government, on questions regarding this school, has referred to reprioritizations in the aid budget. But through dialogue with my colleagues in the Nordic Council, I have understood that they feel great surprise, if not disappointment, at the Swedish government's actions in this matter – especially since the cost actually, one must say, is negligible in relation to the scope of the aid budget.
I would therefore like to ask the Minister: Has it been considered to move these funds to some other area of expenditure? It may feel a bit strange that this is in the aid budget.
Statsrådet Johan Forssell (M)
Madam Speaker! One can naturally ask whether these funds, the 35 million kronor that have been allocated in recent years, make such a big difference for the whole. The problem, of course, is that it is not just about this specific area. There are many other things in the aid. Criticism has also been presented in independent investigations that the aid is too fragmented with far too many strategies and that it seems to act in too many places and does too many things at the same time, which makes it very difficult to achieve impact for the clear priorities we have, for example, sustained support for Ukraine.
It is not that these funds disappear, but they will go to other important purposes; I have mentioned the support to Ukraine several times. But it can also be about increasing humanitarian aid and ensuring that more women and children receive food, water, and medicine and access to hygiene kits and emergency housing. Also, this is a clear priority for the government in our reform agenda.
The school does not constitute any formal Nordic institution, it should be remembered, even though the Nordic countries have chosen to contribute to the financing to varying degrees. But it is still always up to the respective governments to determine the level moving forward.
One can also note that there are other parts of our aid that have a Nordic name or where it is implied that it concerns Nordic funding but where, for example, Norway is not involved in the financing. That should also be remembered in this context.
I can only say that a large part of our aid continues to go to educational initiatives, not least through generous support to Unicef, for example. Just this past year, it meant that 38 million children could go to school. Unesco is another important recipient of Swedish support.
I naturally wish that we could have continued with Swedish support even for this important activity, but as I have said: In a time of difficult priorities and greater global needs and greater needs in Europe than we have ever seen before, one must sometimes make this type of very difficult decision.
We will, of course, continue to follow this issue. I am in contact with my Norwegian colleague. But here we stand today, quite simply.
Catarina Deremar (C)
Madam Speaker! As I said, I appreciated the clear answer even though I was disappointed. But this has nevertheless meant that the Norwegian state in its budget has increased the support by an additional number of millions to compensate for what Sweden has now withdrawn.
I regret this. I truly wish that this school can continue. Future leaders are educated here, who directly take this with them to their home countries and do something good with it. I have, for example, met a former student who went back to their village and started a school, the first one where girls are allowed to attend. So yes, things happen when one gets out into the world and meets others. The school is therefore very important.
Statsrådet Johan Forssell (M)
Madam Speaker! I do not actually think, to continue in the spirit of clarity, that I have much more to add. As we have said, we have a discussion with the Norwegian government regarding this. I also want to point out that the school continues to operate – it is not the case that it is being closed because of this. We will have to have a discussion with the Norwegians about this. I can also, as I said, state that there are certain parts of our aid that Norway also receives a share of but which they choose not to participate in financing, so this is a whole.
That is where we stand today. We will certainly have reason to return to the question in the future. Thank you, Catarina Deremar, for this interpellation!
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.