Response to interpellation 2024/25:251 on the government's initiative on emergency schools
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
1 L believes that emergency schools are a necessary possibility for school administrators to handle order problems and protect safety when students threaten or use violence 1. L argues that the state grant is well-intended and that the method is needed so that teachers and principals dare to act 1. L emphasizes that emergency schools are for acute situations where long-term methods have not sufficed 2. L believes that emergency schools are needed to protect other students and staff from violence and harassment 2 3. L argues that there is scientific support that a new start in a new environment with qualified staff can be good for a student 2. L emphasizes that the school must work more with preventive measures and that students who pose a threat cannot remain in the school 3. S argues that the state grant is too narrow and that many emergency schools stand empty. S argues that municipalities need flexible funds for long-term solutions, such as adapted study groups, instead of short-term placements 4. S believes that the government's cuts to general state grants harm the school 4. 5 S argues that municipalities see a need for something other than emergency schools in order to be able to work long-term 5. S believes that cuts in the municipalities' budgets lead to fewer teachers and special educators 5.
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! I have been asked what measures I and the government intend to take to ensure that funds allocated for state grants for personnel costs for emergency schools are used in a way that actually benefits the students and does not lead to a waste of resources. Mats Wiking has also asked me what lessons I and the government draw from Vänersborg's decision to close its emergency school and pay back the state grant, and how it affects the view of emergency schools as a solution for handling students who disturb the order or threaten other students.
Initially, I can state that all students have the right to feel safe in school, but unfortunately, the development is going in the wrong direction. Insecurity in Swedish schools has instead increased, and viewed over time, the development is negative. According to statistics from Arbetsmiljöverket, reports of threats and violence against teachers and other professional groups in schools, as well as in some cases students, have increased sharply in recent years.
That the school environment is safe and that the teaching is characterized by a study atmosphere is crucial for students to feel well and succeed in school. It is also important for teachers to have a good working environment. There are schools that have very large disciplinary problems, and there often lack practical opportunities to temporarily move students outside their own school when needed. Principals and school administrators therefore need to be given better opportunities to take measures when necessary in order to be able to protect the affected students and, in some cases, also the staff. The emergency schools can provide such an opportunity for administrators to handle disciplinary problems, safeguard safety and the study atmosphere in the school, and ensure continuity in education for all students.
A cultural change is needed in schools, which means that principals and teachers are given more powerful tools to act when students violate, threaten, or use violence. This and much more is currently being investigated by the Inquiry on Strengthened Safety and Peace of Study in Schools (U 2023:06). The inquiry shall, for example, propose how an obligation could be introduced for the principal to move students as a disciplinary measure when it is necessary with regard to the safety and peace of study of other students.
When it comes to emergency schools, the investigator shall analyze the conditions for principals to establish such schools within primary schools in more locations in the country and submit proposals that facilitate the organization of emergency schools when such solutions are needed, for example through cooperation. The investigator shall also take a position on whether the concept of emergency schools should be introduced in the Education Act and whether the regulation in the Education Act that applies to emergency schools should be changed in any respect. All of this may come to strengthen the role of emergency schools in the school system.
The state subsidy for personnel costs for emergency schools in primary school has been well-sought since it was established in 2023. This indicates that the needs for this type of solution are great. For the subsidy year 2024, the school authorities have been granted a total of just over 94 million kronor for the purpose.
Parallelly, the school naturally also needs to receive better conditions to meet every student. In order to, among other things, strengthen the schools' conditions to increase safety and study in school, relieve teachers, improve student health, and better be able to meet the students' needs for support, the government proposes a collective state grant for staff reinforcements in school in the budget bill for 2025. The government proposes that the combined state grant be reinforced with 850 million kronor in 2025. The government also invests in, for example, school social teams to improve safety and study and to increase students' attendance in school.
I naturally follow up on how the state grant for personnel costs for emergency schools is used and am prepared to review the investment if there is a need for it.
Mats Wiking (S)
Madam Speaker! During the period 2023-2027, the Government has allocated 750 million to so-called emergency schools.
According to the regulations for emergency schools, a principal may temporarily place a student in an emergency school if it is required to guarantee the safety and study environment of other students. This placement may, however, not be longer than four weeks.
The Minister for Education says in his response to my interpellation that the support for emergency schools is well-examined. I can only state that the review that the media have conducted of emergency schools shows a different result: Of the country's 290 municipalities, 90 municipalities have received a share of the state grant, but it is only 1 out of 4 municipalities that have started or seen a need.
After two years of investment, it can be seen that a quarter of the emergency schools that have been started stand empty and are not used at all. When I calculate how many municipalities actually have emergency schools with students, I see that they are in the minority.
Does the Minister for Education really still think that the support is well-considered?
Madam Speaker! One then asks why more municipalities do not utilize this state grant.
In contacts with schools regarding why they have not had students in newly started emergency schools, many municipalities respond that they have found other solutions. But a major reason why they tried to start an emergency school was to be able to receive the state grant.
Madam Speaker! Here in Western Sweden, Vänersborg Municipality has applied for and received 1.3 million in state grants to start an emergency school and has invested just as much itself. In total, the municipality has therefore invested 2.6 million, which is a lot for a small municipality like Vänersborg.
Despite this investment, only one student was placed in Vänersborg's emergency school, which led to the operation eventually being shut down and the state grants being repaid. The school principal in Vänersborg and the municipality's schools found other solutions, which demonstrates the shortcomings in directing a state grant toward such a narrow focus as emergency schools.
Madam Speaker! The media's investigation also shows that many municipalities in the country believe that emergency schools are not a long-term solution to the problems with disruptive and violent students.
What works well in a large municipality may not work well in a small municipality.
Many municipalities have therefore told the media that it would have been better if the state grant for emergency schools had been more flexible, so that the municipalities themselves could have adapted their measures instead of being forced to start emergency schools in order to be able to receive the state grant.
Both the government and the undersigned know that the needs are great when it comes to creating safety and study environments in schools. Why then make a government grant so narrow that only a few large municipalities can utilize it? Does the government not consider that the municipalities should be trusted to find solutions themselves to strengthen safety and study environments in schools?
I therefore want to ask the Minister for Education if she is satisfied with the so-called initiative, given that so few emergency schools have actually started, as well as what she thinks about the criticism that has been received that the state grant for emergency schools is too narrow.
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Madam Speaker! Perhaps a few words should be said about what this state grant is for and what type of students it concerns. These are students who behave very badly. They behave in such a way that the school considers that they can no longer remain in the regular classroom, either because they threaten and harass their classmates or because they subject teachers and other staff to, at times, violence but often threats and harassment. These students risk suspension, something that the primary school has the right to do. But so that these students are not simply sent home to a non-functioning activity where they receive no schooling, there is this alternative for them, so that they receive help and support from qualified staff during that time.
I believe that Mats Wiking is right that it is easier for large municipalities to organize this, as they probably - unfortunately, one might have to say - have more students who are in need of emergency schools. But there are also examples of quite small municipalities that have applied for this state grant because they have this type of very large problem among a fairly small number of students, which in turn can expose an entire school to very large problems.
With that said, it is obvious that all state grants must be reviewed. Now we know nothing about the outcome for 2024; the figures for that will not be available until February. Then we will see what the outcome has been.
In a small municipality, it can very well be the case that one has a need concerning one or a few students. Half a year later, perhaps that need no longer exists. In that case, it is a matter of creating a flexibility so that the staff can be used in other schools for other tasks. I think it is important to be able to review that.
But I am completely convinced that this method, emergency schools, was truly needed, partly so that teachers and principals do not feel that they do not dare to exclude students because there is nowhere for those students to go, partly because we see that Swedish schools are very rowdy. We see that the reports to the Work Environment Authority have skyrocketed when it comes to threats and harassment against both staff and other students. I am convinced that the method with emergency schools has come to stay.
Mats Wiking (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer.
Of course, we have a school today that in many ways is unsafe. Measures are needed to create a study environment. All students need those measures, both the students who remain at the school and the students who cannot remain at the school. It is very much about how one thinks long-term regarding the measures that are implemented. A measure at an emergency school only lasts for a month, and one must return to some form of activity afterwards. I believe it is very important to link the measures together, so that there is a long-term line. The result should, in the long run, be that the disruptive students return to the education system and that all students receive an education.
I have experience as a social worker and have worked for many years with students who have burned their chances in regular school. Many of these students lack grades and unfortunately have a negative experience of school. Some of the students become, just as the Minister says, outgoing and difficult to manage. Situations can then arise where the student cannot remain in the regular activities and one needs to find other solutions.
The school where the student has been placed - and perhaps has attended for a number of years - and its principal often have a clear picture of the student's situation, what the student needs, and what interventions need to be made for the student and the school. It is about finding long-term interventions that hold over time. A placement in an emergency school, as stated, only lasts four weeks and is rarely a prioritized intervention in this situation. On the other hand, the municipalities need resources to be able to create solutions that suit their specific schools and students.
Madam Speaker! The solution that most municipalities see as functional is differently adapted study groups where students can be for the time they need to be investigated and study in a smaller group. These groups should, of course, have competent staff with training in handling outgoing students and be able to work in close cooperation with student health services and social services.
When the government now wants to create study rooms in schools, it misses the real goal. A first measure from the government should have been not to save on the general state grants to the municipalities. With the government's cuts to the municipalities, Sweden's schools are forced to lay off teachers, special educators, and student health personnel, the group of staff that is the basis for there being security in the school. To, in such a situation, direct a narrow state grant to something that very few municipalities have requested is like putting a bandage on a very large wound.
Madam Speaker! The school world is also skeptical that emergency schools will solve the problems with safety and study environment. We have followed the debate in newspapers and on TV and have a snapshot from the media.
Sveriges Lärare, which organizes our teachers and other staff working in schools, says that primarily investments in preventive work are needed and that, for example, resource schools and support staff in regular schools must be given sufficient financial means instead of the government reducing the funds to the municipalities, which results in staff being laid off. Sveriges Lärare also argues that the government's specially designated state grants for emergency schools will become an emergency solution that only large municipalities can utilize.
Nihad Bunar, professor at the Department of Special Pedagogy at Stockholm University, warns in the same newspaper, Vi Lärare, that there is an obvious risk that municipalities may begin placing students in emergency schools even though they do not actually belong there. He argues that the government "is making a mass phenomenon out of something that is not well-thought-out." He is concerned that the bar will be lowered so that the emergency school has something to do and so that the money will be spent. These are some of the critics in the row.
What does the Minister for Education consider most useful when it comes to targeted grants: funds that go to short-term placements in emergency schools or funds that go to schools and municipalities finding long-term solutions for students who act out?
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Madam Speaker! It is of course clear that long-term perspective is absolutely the best when it comes to this type of student. We know that special support is implemented incredibly late in the Swedish school system. The truth is that most of the special support is implemented in grade 9. We also know that we have students and even children in preschool who are incredibly outgoing. It is clear that long-term perspective and providing good resources from the very beginning is A and O.
But the acute schools are about exactly what the word implies, namely acute situations where a student risks being suspended. Sometimes one has used the long-term methods and really worked very hard but still ended up in the acute situation. Sometimes one has not. But these two things do not stand against each other.
I am convinced that unfortunately there will always be a need for more acute measures when it concerns a certain type of student. I personally have experience of this from Stockholm, where we have had acute schools for a long time. There, the Socialdemokraterna even chose to expand them because they saw that a need existed.
I do not, however, think that one should set emergency schools against more preventive measures, as they are also needed. It is partly against this background that the government is now proposing that the staff-reinforcement state grants should be doubled before next year, if the Riksdag decides on it, precisely so that more staff can be hired who have competence, among other things, in handling that type of student. I am convinced that the state grants for emergency schools are needed.
Then, when it comes to research support and so on, Skolverket says that there is research support for the fact that it can be good for a student to completely change environments, to get a new start and to be able to receive help from qualified staff, that is, counselors, special education teachers and so on, in order to then either go back to their home school or receive a placement at another school. There is scientific support for this.
Then one might wonder why the emergency schools that exist in Sweden and have existed for quite a few years have not been researched, nor have their results. In Stockholm, we conducted an evaluation to see what had happened, and the evaluation was very positive. Now, this was some time ago, but those who were most positive in the evaluation were actually the students themselves. That was because the activities they encountered had very competent staff who could truly provide the students with support so that they could move forward.
One must, however, remember that the absolutely most important reason for the emergency schools is that other students and staff risk being very badly affected if one does not act forcefully when students behave in such a way that this is required.
Mats Wiking (S)
Madam Speaker! There are certainly good things about emergency schools if they are linked to other activities where the students can receive good support and be investigated over a longer period so that they can gradually return to the system.
What the municipalities mean in their responses to the media, however, is that they see a need for something other than emergency schools in order to be able to work more long-term. It is clear that it may be a miscalculation that schools cannot handle students in a long-term way and need to send them away to an emergency school.
I think it becomes very strange when the Minister for Education says that the schools are satisfied with the effort. Now that the government is cutting so much on the money to municipalities and regions, it becomes completely obvious that one must cut down on the number of teachers, special educators, social workers, and school health services in the school. I see this also in my home municipality Trollhättan.
There are pluses and minuses, and the big minus is the cut that occurs regarding the municipalities. Even though the government says that the municipalities themselves should manage the handling with the money, the state grants that SKR, Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner, have calculated are important to be able to manage healthcare, school, and elderly care. It becomes a very strange discussion.
Emergency schools in all their glory, but the regular operations will not function better when one cuts back on the measures. Both school principals and SKR, Sveriges Kommuner och Regioner, argue that the support for emergency schools is too narrow and does not suit all municipalities. They have even written a letter to the government stating that the measures are too short-sighted.
Does the Minister for Education believe that Sveriges kommuner and Skolverket are wrong when they say that emergency schools do not meet the municipalities' actual needs when it comes to addressing the rowdiness in our schools? And is more research and evidence on emergency schools not needed before proceeding with more support?
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Madam Speaker! I am completely convinced that emergency schools - unfortunately, I must say - will be needed even in the future. I also believe that unfortunately there are even small municipalities that will have a need for them for the type of students who risk exclusion because they behave in such a way that they actually pose a threat. They must have somewhere to go and be met by qualified staff.
As much as I am convinced of this, I am convinced that the school must work more with preventive measures, that we must provide special support earlier, that we must achieve a better functioning student health service and, not least, that students who have major problems in occurring cases must receive help from child and adolescent psychiatry.
I believe it is important that we understand that Swedish schools have major problems with violence and harassment and that it is not an option for these students to remain in school. They repeatedly expose other students and staff to danger and cannot remain there.
I think that we – and this also applies to some researchers – have for far too long only looked at it from these students' perspectives and whether the measures being taken work from that perspective. The truth is that we must see it from the perspective of the entire school and all other students and all staff.
We have situations today where we close entire schools because a small number of students behave in such a way that the school is no longer safe. This is, in my opinion, completely unacceptable. It is also from this perspective that the investment should be seen.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.