Response to interpellation 2023/24:662 on children's right to school transport in case of serious illness or disability
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns children's right to school transport in the case of serious illness or disability after a school election has been made. L argues that students have a right to school transport if needed with regard to the student's disability or other special circumstances, provided that it can be done without economic or organizational difficulties for the municipality 1. L assumes that municipalities make individual assessments based on the child's best interests and is prepared to follow the issue to potentially take future initiatives or review legislative changes 1 2 3. SD considers that municipalities often claim difficulties in order to deny school transport, which forces parents into legal battles 4 5. SD wants clearer legislation that creates an equal right throughout the country and proposes an investigation to simplify the regulatory framework 5 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 Lotta Edholm (L)
Madam Speaker! Mattias Eriksson Falk has asked me whether I intend and am prepared to take some initiatives to ensure that children's needs are met regarding the right to school transport in the case of serious illness or disability that arises after a choice of school has been made or, if the answer is no, why not.
A pupil in municipal preschool, primary school, or adapted primary school has, according to the Education Act (2010:800), the right to free school transport if needed with regard to the length of the route, traffic conditions, the pupil's disability, or any other special circumstance. When a pupil applies for school transport, all these prerequisites shall be examined individually in the specific case. Mattias Eriksson Falk gives an example of a situation that may arise when a pupil who has chosen a different school than the school where the home municipality would otherwise have placed him or her is affected by a serious illness or disability that was not known at the time of choosing the school. In such a situation, the right to school transport applies provided that it can be done without organizational or economic difficulties for the home municipality. The same applies if the pupil has chosen a school in another municipality or an independent school.
As I have previously answered, I assume that the head of the school and the student's home municipality take their responsibility to ensure all students have access to the education they are entitled to and, to the greatest extent possible, meet their needs. I will therefore follow the question in order to be able to take future initiatives if necessary.
Mattias Eriksson Falk (SD)
Madam Speaker! I thank Minister for Education Lotta Edholm for the answer to my interpellation, which is a result of the written question I previously posed to the Minister regarding the same important issue: children's right to school transport in the case of serious illness or disability.
The background to the interpellation we are now debating is my own commitment to children and young people. I could say it goes back as far as my time in the student council at Nynässkolan in Gävle many years ago. That is where it began, and it never really lets go of one. It is perhaps also a partial reason why I, as a person, sought out politics and a commitment there at an early age. Everything is democracy, albeit in slightly different forms and in different places in society. Regardless of whether we sit in the student council in school or as elected representatives in the Swedish Riksdag, our work is to be part of the search for opportunities for improvements in society. Then politics can lead us there by different paths, but often with the conviction that a change is needed and why it is needed.
I believe that I and the minister are fundamentally in agreement on this issue regarding the rights of children and young people. It is particularly important to be able to support children with serious illness or disabilities. But I will honestly say that I had hoped for a somewhat clearer answer from the Minister for Education. My perception is that the minister chooses to place somewhat too much trust in the municipalities, which have responsibility for school transport according to law, and their ability to take children's needs into account.
The municipalities may have an obligation to arrange school transport in more cases than they usually do if it can be done without organizational or economic difficulties, as the minister mentions. In practice, however, the municipalities always claim that such difficulties exist. There are countless examples of municipalities all over Sweden, with a wide palette of arguments, saying no to school transport for children with illness or disabilities. The most common is, after all, that it concerns the placement school or that one is referred to, for example, a basic special school.
In many cases, parents are forced to appeal and end up in a maze of legislation. In addition to the child being affected by illness or disability, which in most cases changes its life very much regardless, parents can also need to take up a fight against the municipality in a matter of school transport. The question one may need to ask is whether the time is best used for the child or for arguing with the municipality.
I would like to specifically mention the support I have received from the Children's Cancer Fund in this matter and the communication we have had. The Children's Cancer Fund, as the Minister surely understands, comes into contact with many families who experience the problem described in my interpellation and which I am trying to convey here in the chamber.
The Minister naturally cannot take responsibility for all individual decisions, especially not for those made before the time she and the government took office. I still want to mention examples of how it looks in Sweden. In one case, it concerns a girl with a disability that forces her to use a wheelchair. We are talking about a child who attends the middle stage of primary school and has her peers, her schooling, and at the same time a disability to take into account. The school she attends is already adapted for people with disabilities, but the girl was not granted the right to school transport by the municipality. If the girl had switched to a primary special school, she would have received that right. In this case, however, it was not about an intellectual disability but about a physical injury. Thus, the primary special school is also not the correct placement. Now, I do not expect the Minister to answer regarding the individual case I raise or to be aware of it, but I wanted to take an example.
The Minister said in the response that she intends to follow up on the issue so that the municipalities take their responsibility. I am naturally curious about how the Minister intends to follow up on the issue. It places quite large demands on information gathering, as many school transport trials are being conducted around Sweden. I would be grateful if the Minister could clarify this.
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Madam Speaker! This is about students who have chosen a different school than the one the municipality wanted to place them in and after that have suffered an accident, cancer, or something similar. In that case, one does not have a right to school transport based on what the member is speaking about. This certainly does not concern very many children, but for the children it does concern, it can have very troublesome consequences if they are forced to change schools or if their parents are forced to fight for their right to school transport, which they perhaps did not have a need for previously.
At the same time, it is important to establish that the municipality shall conduct an individual assessment, and I assume that this is done based on the best interests of the child. But just as I said in the interpellation response, I will follow the question to see if we eventually need to take some initiatives to change the situation. What would be required in that case is a legislative change, so it is not done in a heartbeat to change this.
Mattias Eriksson Falk (SD)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister again for the answer to my interpellation. I also thank her for the answer to the additional question I asked here in the debate based on the Minister's answer to the interpellation. The Minister is welcome to further clarify how she intends to follow this. I, too, am of course convinced that a legislative change may be needed.
As I have explained, children's right to school transport is important to me and to all those children and parents who are affected by legislation that, in my and their eyes, is insufficient when it comes to the municipalities' responsibility for school transport. The child has a right to education and is guaranteed education according to the Education Act, but the municipality may wish to move the student. Such examples exist in various places in Sweden.
Regardless of how one views this issue, it is obvious that society benefits in every way from a student who needs school transport being present at school, receiving an education, and meeting peers. The value of that cannot, of course, be stated in kronor.
In my first speech, I mentioned the example of a girl who was not granted the right to school transport. I therefore also want to highlight an example of when a child actually did receive it, because I think it is important for the debate. It was a boy in a municipality in south-eastern Sweden who was first told no, but where local politicians acted, changed the regulations, and made it possible for the cancer-stricken boy in question to receive that right.
It is good, but unfortunately, not all municipalities act that way – or politicians, for that matter. At the same time, there is the ongoing case involving a seriously ill child who has been denied school transport by the municipality, and where the parents themselves are going to try to appeal and get justice in court. Appealing takes time and energy and shows how different rules hit parents and children negatively, while those who are resource-strong likely have better conditions to appeal and get justice.
There is a real need to establish legislation that makes the regulatory framework and the law equal across the country so that support for getting to school for children with serious illness or disabilities does not depend on which part of the country the child lives in. Perhaps the Minister can take the initiative for an inquiry into how the legislation on school transport could be changed and clarified to avoid families ending up in this limbo depending on which municipality they live in.
The municipalities' objection in many cases is that if they make an exception for one person, they need to practically do it for everyone, so obviously there is a strong need for a review and a clarification of the legislation so that the right to school transport for children with special needs does not create a practice that becomes unsustainable in other ways. We must have legislation that is just and correct but which also creates conditions for municipalities to handle the issues that arise.
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Madam Speaker! As I said initially, this is an issue that affects relatively few students, but those students who are affected are, on the other hand, affected in a very serious way. This also shows that there are large differences in how the municipalities manage their schools in general.
I think it is good when local politicians react to what is perceived as irregularities and take initiatives that ensure that a very small group of very vulnerable students can actually get this opportunity to keep their school transport if they were to experience an accident, a disability, or a severe illness.
As I have said before, I am prepared to look at this and follow it, but I do not dare promise anything here and now in the chamber.
Mattias Eriksson Falk (SD)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister again for the answer and for a good debate. This is my final speech.
I hope that Minister for Education Lotta Edholm takes with her what I have highlighted here today – which the Minister intends to do, if I have understood correctly – regarding the need for clearer legislation and for a clarification of children's rights in this case.
It is not reasonable with this extensive bureaucracy and the struggle parents need to take with the municipalities. It is in many ways a battle between David and Goliath in this case, where parents actually have to fight. The one who has resources might be able to win the right to school transport in court, while the one who does not might not even be able to appeal.
I personally do not believe that large, drastic changes in the legislation are needed. But changes that clarify the right, that clarify it for the municipality, and that simply make it easier for children and parents are needed. In the end, I think everyone can agree on one thing: The fewer cases that end up in our courts, the more society saves in the end - money that can be used for more welfare and a better school for everyone, where your right is not determined by where in Sweden you live.
I really hope that the Minister for Education takes the initiative for an investigation that can provide the answer regarding the legislation that is needed. The question is worth looking into more closely, not least for all children who today are ill or have a disability and for cases that will come in the future.
Finally, I would like to particularly thank the Children's Cancer Foundation, which has contributed with good material and information to me as a member of Parliament so that I can highlight examples and the need for changes in the legislation, which I, as an elected representative in the Swedish Riksdag, have had the opportunity to present to the Minister in this debate.
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Madam Speaker! There are, of course, possibilities for the municipalities to consider special reasons to maintain school transport for those who have chosen a school other than the nearest school and then suffer an accident or cancer or something similar that causes the person to need school transport to the school that has been chosen. For many parents and students, this can become a major problem when one is forced to handle this in an already difficult situation. The municipalities must, of course, look at each case individually, and I also assume that municipalities actually ensure the children's best interests when making these types of assessments.
As I have said, I am prepared to follow up on this issue and possibly, if it will be necessary, review the possibilities of changing the law. But I do not dare promise anything here and now in the chamber.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.