Response to interpellation 2023/24:748 on the establishment ban for profit-seeking independent schools
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns an establishment ban for profit-seeking school corporations and deficiencies in the independent school system. L argues that the government is carrying out a complete renovation through investigations into ownership reviews, profit distribution limitations, and stricter sanctions 1. L acknowledges major problems in the independent school sector but refrains from promising an establishment ban as it requires analysis and legislation 2. L emphasizes that school should be a national responsibility to create equality 3. S wants to introduce an establishment ban for school corporations and give municipalities a right of veto 4 5. S criticizes L for inconsistency and argues that the government does not go far enough to regulate the market 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! Linus Sköld has asked me if I intend to act to curb the growth of private school corporations and, if so, how and when.
All children and students shall get a good start in life. To conduct education within the school system in Sweden means to manage society's trust for that mission. The Government considers that unserious and unsuitable actors should not occur within the school system. Therefore, we are now starting a complete renovation of the Swedish independent school system.
The Government decided on 6 July 2023 on supplementary directives for the Inquiry into Profit in Schools. The investigator shall, among other things, propose an expanded ownership and management review, certain profit distribution prohibitions or other profit distribution limitations, and significantly tightened sanctions. It concerns a package of various measures as a response to all cases where children's and students' right to a good education is not met. The inquiry shall present its proposals by 28 February 2025 at the latest.
When applying for approval as a principal of an independent school, the Swedish Schools Inspectorate shall, among other things, examine whether the education entails significant negative consequences in the long term for the students or for the part of the school system organized by the public in the municipality where the education is to be conducted. The Swedish National Audit Office, which has reviewed the regulatory framework, considers however that the preparatory works do not provide clear guidance on how the student perspective should be weighed in the long term and notes that it occurs that municipalities do not comment on applications to establish new schools. It is also common that the comments received cannot be used by the Swedish Schools Inspectorate, as they are, for example, kept too general.
In order to ensure the School Inspectorate a solid basis for their review of an application to establish a school, the Inquiry on Profit in Schools also has a mandate to submit proposals implying that it shall be mandatory for municipalities to comment on the application. Additionally, the inquiry shall analyze the application of the regulations on negative consequences when reviewing an application to start an independent school.
In order to prevent unserious and unsuitable actors from appearing within the school system, additional funds were proposed in the budget bill for 2024 for Skolinspektionen so that it can strengthen the inspection of principals and schools. The Riksdag decided in accordance with the government's proposal. The budget for Skolinspektionens administrative grant increases by 25 million kronor in 2024 and is expected to increase by 40 million kronor in 2025 and 60 million kronor from 2026 onwards. The expansion of Skolinspektionens operations means that the authority can increase its presence and conduct more inspections, including more unannounced visits.
Linus Sköld (S)
Madam Speaker! "That the independent school sector is facing major problems cannot have escaped anyone. Independent schools have more unauthorized teachers, lower teacher density, are worse off with school libraries, and have greater problems with cheated grades."
Furthermore, there are numerous examples where school fees have gone to everything other than the students' education, such as sex clubs in Thailand, to waffle stands, or to independent schools that conduct 'conversion' therapy for homosexual students.
The bankruptcies we have seen also show that the independent school sector carries great risks.
Today's system for financing independent schools has, moreover, an unhealthy and cost-driving structure for the municipalities. All of this comes at the expense of both students and taxpayers in an unreasonable way. The drivers that exist today in the independent school system benefit neither the students nor the school system as a whole.
Madam Speaker! This could have been the beginning of my speech today. But it is not. It is a quote, signed by Lotta Edholm, from Expressen on April 11 this year.
Based on what Lotta Edholm herself writes in Expressen, she and I agree on all essential points regarding the problem picture when it comes to the independent school sector. The drive to make money is prioritized by profit-driven independent schools, in particular school corporations, higher than the drive to provide a good education for the students – which is what the school is for.
So we cannot have that. As Lotta Edholm describes the school market, we cannot have that.
As mentioned, the school market is consolidating. This means that more and more school groups are becoming larger. Over the last three years, the number of school groups has increased by over 20 percent. And by this point, one in ten schools in the country is owned by a group, which has the overriding objective of providing profit to the owner. This has the consequences that Lotta Edholm herself describes in Expressen.
This was the background for why we Social Democrats a couple of months ago proposed the introduction of an establishment ban for school groups. When we submitted that proposal to the Education Committee, Lotta Edholm had the opportunity to comment on it in the media. At that time, she stated in an email to SVT that there are major problems in the independent school sector but that she did not know if an establishment ban is the right way forward. That is why we have this interpellation debate today. I thought that Lotta Edholm should be allowed to state whether it is the right way forward to immediately stop the groups' expansion until a profit ban can be put in place that addresses the drivers that Lotta Edholm herself says are harmful to the Swedish school system.
Will there be an establishment ban for school groups, Lotta Edholm - yes or no?
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Madam Speaker! I thought I recognized the phrasing, but one always becomes a bit uncertain when someone in the opposition reads out what one has written!
It is clear that we have major problems in the independent school sector. The government is fully aware of this. The government has also given directives to the independent school inquiry to present proposals to address the problems that actually exist. One of them is that there are unhealthy drivers in the independent school system that lead to some of the effects that both Linus Sköld and I have described in different ways.
When it comes to the establishment ban, I do not dare to give any answer to the question in the chamber today. It needs to be analyzed. There is no legislation today that could make it possible, as far as I can see. It must, in that case, be investigated, and Linus Sköld knows just as well as I do that it can take time. I therefore do not dare to give a statement. On the other hand, it is purely generally true that we must do something about the free school sector because there are major problems in it, not least on the upper secondary side. That is why an investigation is currently underway. It is to provide a statement at some point in the beginning of next year regarding which changes will be proposed to make the system better.
Linus Sköld (S)
Madam Speaker! Regarding the preparatory documents for introducing an establishment ban for school groups, is there a completed document on introducing an establishment ban for religious independent schools? Lotta Edholm could perhaps start by seeing what can be learned from that? Then perhaps the path to stopping the predatory operation of the Swedish school system could become somewhat shorter.
Lotta Edholm said in Dagens Nyheter not so long ago that Swedish school before the reforms – referring to those in the 90s – was considered among the world's best, but that it declined thereafter. That reminds me of a statement made in Aftonbladet on May 7, 2021: "Sweden has had the world's best and most equal school - that is where we are going again." It was signed by Anna Ekström.
There are, therefore, incredibly close points of contact between how the Minister for Education expresses herself in the media and how the Social Democrats and even other parties in the opposition have described the situation in the Swedish school market. In that case, it is surprising that Lotta Edholm does not support the proposals that the Social Democrats put forward to a greater extent. Lotta Edholm's party colleague, who had also signed that Express article, Fredrik Malm, chairman of the Education Committee, voted down the initiative to investigate the issue of an establishment ban, even though Lotta Edholm says that it would need to be analyzed. One might think that it is a strange inconsistency in the party's stance.
One can also note that in the article in Dagens Nyheter that I just mentioned, it states that the previous government tried to regulate the school market, but that the proposal was stopped by the bourgeois parties and SD - including the Liberals. Lotta Edholm was asked if they regretted it, and answered "Yes, I would really say that."
The proposals concerned differentiating the school fee between independent and municipal schools, introducing requirements for reporting structural costs, and prohibiting purchase time as a basis for selection. They are ready on the minister's desk. If the minister regrets that the Liberals did not vote for them, they can simply be presented as an alternative, if one does not know how one wants to position oneself regarding our proposal on the establishment ban.
When it comes to the question of the planning of the system, i.e., the municipalities' duty to comment on which Lotta Edholm has commissioned an inquiry into, the Social Democrats want to go one step further. We want to give the municipalities a veto over the establishment of independent schools. So far, Lotta Edholm is not prepared to go that far. Why, if she simultaneously states that the school voucher is an inefficient way to utilize the common resources allocated for education, as it is organized now?
There are several parts in this where I think Lotta Edholm would need to provide a bit more substance regarding why she is not prepared to go further and faster. She sits in the ultimate position of power over the Swedish school system, and here are ready-made proposals and ideas that could be moved forward to regulate the market much faster than Lotta Edholm marches. How can that be?
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Madam Speaker! There are naturally points of contact between the opposition and the government regarding the view on the free school system and what is functioning poorly within it. That is entirely true. But what Linus Sköld forgets to talk about are all the other problems that also exist in a poorly functioning school system. The changes that occurred in the early 1990s regarding the free schools were not the only changes.
The major change had occurred a couple of years earlier when the Social Democrats, against better judgment, I would say, municipalized the responsibility for Swedish schools. Many of the problems, especially when it comes to the allocation of resources where there is a difference of approximately 70,000 kronor per pupil and year in how much the municipalities invest between those who invest the most and those who invest the least, are consequences of the fact that the school system was no longer seen as a national responsibility but as a municipal responsibility.
In the investigation concerning a national school fee norm, the question of the financing of independent schools also arises. The proposal is that it should be investigated how the financing can be divided between municipal schools and independent schools to avoid always being forced to pay out exactly the same amount to the independent schools as to the municipal schools, regardless of whether they have had the same costs or not. The Social Democrats have no answer at all to that question. You think that the municipalization of the school was a great idea. We can, therefore, not seek any answers from the Social Democrats in that specific question.
Linus Sköld (S)
Madam Speaker! I can remind Lotta Edholm that when the Liberals formed a government basis for the Social Democrats, an inquiry was commissioned regarding the potential nationalization of the school, and a knowledge base was produced. But when the Liberals formed a government together with the Tidögänget, nationalization of the school was not mentioned with even a single word in the agreement.
I imagine that Lotta Edholm could have gone much further in the problem descriptions she is now providing if she had invited the parties to broadly discuss the ownership, the funding, and the view on knowledge in the Swedish school. Then we might have received a system that endured over time. But Lotta Edholm chooses to jump into the conflict barrel, and then it becomes what it becomes. That is not the question we are discussing now.
The question that this debate concerns is specifically the school market system and what Lotta Edholm intends to do about it. It will not be a question of any establishment ban, based on the answer I receive now. The reason for this is obvious.
The times it sounds as if Lotta Edholm and I agree are when Lotta Edholm signs with "member of the party board, Liberalerna" on Expressen's debate page. But when she is a representative of the government, which makes collective decisions, she will never be allowed to investigate measures as far-reaching as those required to rectify this system for the other parties in the government.
Lotta Edholm has compromised with parties that do not share her views when it comes to the school issue. That is why there is no mention of nationalization in the Tidö Agreement, and that is why there will be no regulation of the school market that will make any real difference.
Lotta Edholm, if I forgot to speak about nationalization, Lotta Edholm forgot to speak about her party comrades.
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Madam Speaker! These questions are very much interconnected, that is, partly the independent school system and the deficiencies that exist there, and partly how the school is financed.
The investigation that the Liberals forced through in the January agreement is a very important basis for the investigation that is now ongoing, which concerns the national school funding norm, that is, how we are to achieve a system that becomes equitable, so that it does not matter in which municipality one lives and in which municipality the children go to school. We need to create a more equitable system. It concerns the independent school sector, but it also concerns the funding of the municipal schools. It obviously does not work particularly well today when there are such enormous differences regarding how much money the municipalities are actually prepared to invest in their schools.
I believe that school is a national responsibility. A school system should be national. That is how it is in most countries in the world. In Sweden, it is not so, but we delegate to 290 municipalities to do a bit as they themselves wish. Especially when it comes to the financing, this is a major problem. Some municipalities choose to invest much less in their schools than other municipalities do. Some municipalities simply do not have the means to invest more because the system is very unequal. It is among other things this that we hope to be able to rectify.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.