Response to interpellation 2024/25:35 on the government's reduction of the number of places in higher education

Utbildningsministern Johan Pehrson (L)

Madam Speaker! Linus Sköld has asked me if I have analyzed the effects of the lowered ceiling amounts for 2025 and how I intend to act so that the decreasing availability of educational places does not worsen skills supply and matching on the labor market. Finally, Linus Sköld has asked what measures the government is taking so that an increased proportion of unemployed people shall have adequate access to higher education.

The government's education policy shall create conditions for high-quality education and research. Through strengthened skills supply, Sweden can enable an effective climate transition, strengthen the industry's competitiveness, strengthen the quality in school and healthcare, and protect and safeguard our democratic and open society.

Regarding higher education, the government considers it important to safeguard campus-based education in order to maintain a qualitative education and research environment as well as a qualitative educational offer at all universities and colleges.

To strengthen the conditions for good quality in education and the educational offering, the government therefore increases the compensation for the fields of humanities, social sciences, law, and theology in the latest budget bill within the framework of current resources. This enables more teacher-led time and better prepares students for their future professional lives. It is an important signal that the focus is on high quality rather than a continued expansion of the number of students in higher education within these areas.

In the budget bill for 2024, measures were presented to strengthen the drivers for a high-quality educational offering to provide the labor market with enhanced competence regarding engineers. This is financed partly through lowered ceiling amounts. It is up to the higher education institutions to determine how many students they admit and into which programs, which means that this change may look different at different institutions.

It is important to emphasize that it is not only the number of places that is decisive, but also the quality and orientation of the education. The purpose is, on the contrary, to strengthen the drivers for an educational offering of high quality that can provide the labor market with the competence that is needed. The Government further intends to investigate how the higher education institutions' educational offerings can be more effectively steered towards an educational offering of high quality that is relevant to society's and the labor market's needs for future competence, while the opportunities for education remain good.

Regarding the question of what measures the government is taking so that an increased proportion of the unemployed shall have adequate access to higher education, the government notes that the welfare sector and the business community have difficulty finding labor with the right skills despite there being many who can work.

Labor market training, universities of applied sciences, and regional vocational adult education can increase the employability of the unemployed. The Government has therefore made extensive investments within education policy and also proposes in this bill additional funds for more places within regional vocational adult education. More unemployed people need to participate in educational initiatives to a greater extent in order to obtain a job. Both the number of participants in labor market training and the transitions to regular education need to increase, not least among the unemployed with short education.

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Madam Speaker! Unlike Johan Pehrson, I believe that in times of increasing unemployment and recession, it is smart to invest in ensuring that more people can receive education.

This government is making cuts in the number of educational places in the budget for 2025, which means that fewer people will be able to receive education during 2025 than was the case in 2024. That is crystal clear. This applies, moreover, to both the academic programs and the other forms of education for adults enumerated by Johan Pehrson. Both labor market training, regional vocational adult education, and the university college will receive fewer places as a direct consequence of the budget that the government has placed on the table of the Riksdag. Believe nothing else!

I now move to the matter for this debate. I have asked Johan Pehrson if he has made any analysis of the effects of these changes, and I would like to interpret his rather long answer as the simple word no. There is no such analysis. He cannot answer how the number of places in different educations will be affected as a consequence of the proposed changes with the redistributions of caps or the increases in price tags that the government is making. Johan Pehrson does not know. He conducts politics blindly. He does not even make assumptions about it.

To have this confirmed, I submitted a written question on September 29 of this year, where I asked the minister straight out how many fewer places he plans this change will lead to. Nor on that question – how many fewer places the minister assumes the changes will render – is there any answer. I find it worrying that we have an education minister who takes his assignment so lightly and simply makes changes completely blindly.

I still think that Johan Pehrson may have done a more detailed piece of work ahead of this debate and has an answer with him, so the first question I would like Johan Pehrson to answer is: How many fewer places in higher education, in total in the whole country, will there be in 2025?

When it comes to the redistribution of the ceiling amounts, it concerns a total of 100 million distributed among a number of different educational institutions around the country. The Government itself writes in the budget bill that it aims at distance education and those with low throughput.

I would like to hear Johan Pehrson tell which educations he thinks should be scaled down or phased out as a consequence of the reductions in the ceiling amounts. It is quite clear that the money is to be used for a specific type of education. It actually states in the answer to the written question I asked that it is precisely engineering educations that are not to be financed with these funds.

So, which educations are it that are to be cut, Johan Pehrson? That is my second question. How many fewer places will there be, and on which educations will there be fewer places? I think Johan Pehrson owes both me and all of Utbildningssverige an answer to those questions.

(Applause)

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

Peder Björk (S)

Madam Speaker! When one hears the Minister describe the SD government's education policy, it sounds as if one is investing in education in Sweden. It would have been good if one had actually done that, considering where we find ourselves in the economic cycle. As recently as today, we have received new figures where unemployment and layoffs in Sweden are increasing even further. In that case, an offensive education policy would have been a good tool.

That is not the case, Madam Speaker. Now that we are being presented with the SD government's budget, we can observe that they are doing exactly the opposite.

Let me, Madam Speaker, take a concrete example from northern Sweden. There, they are cutting the four northernmost universities by 40 million kronor over the next two years. That means 40 million less to invest in teaching. It means 40 million less to ensure that more people enter education.

It is clear that no one in here has anything against investing in increased quality or in more campus-based education. But it becomes completely the wrong direction if it is done at the expense of the number of study places. It is precisely that we see will happen now – not least in northern Sweden, a part of the country where the green transition has been ongoing for several years, where they are crying out for competence when they are going to build up new operations and where we really need to invest in education. There, the SD-government will therefore cut back.

And it is not enough that one should cut back on educational places in general; the consequence of the SD government's direction is also that they want to see less distance learning. Precisely in northern Sweden, where competence exchange was needed, distance education is one of the keys for people in the middle of their lives to be able to pursue higher education at all, given the long distances we have in northern Sweden. It simply does not work to get to campus when you are in the middle of your life, have a family and children, and perhaps already have an employment but still want to exchange competence and further your education.

My question, Madam Speaker, to the Minister of Education is therefore: What is the Minister's message to all those people who have dreamed of and are ready to change careers in the middle of life but who, with the SD government's policy, will now not get that chance?

(Applause)

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

Kalle Olsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Many of us can testify to the importance of there having been a university in relatively close proximity to where we live. Here, the former chairman of TCO, Sture Nordh, writes: "I grew up in my mother's large farmhouse kitchen, as the third son in the sibling group on our Västerbottnian farm. . I am quite sure that if Umeå University had not existed in reasonable geographical proximity, my path of study would have been different."

The same reasoning applies to many young boys and girls in my constituency, Jämtland. In Jämtland County, we have one of the lowest transition rates to higher education in the country. But the fact that we have Mid Sweden University, that we have beautiful campuses in Östersund and Sundsvall, and in addition very good opportunities for distance education, has significantly contributed to our ability to lower the thresholds for higher education and enable more people to retrain or build upon previous educations.

No, not everyone wants to become an academic, but everyone should have reasonable opportunities to find their way in life, regardless of where one lives and regardless of class background. If one does not bring a tradition of studying from home, it becomes even more important that, just as for Sture Nordh, there are good opportunities to still take the step. Then, in addition to campus-based education, the possibility of distance education can be a way. Individual courses can be another.

Earlier this year, Johan Pehrson's predecessor, Mats Persson, published a debate article. He had discovered some distance courses with somewhat amusing names and took it as an opportunity to argue that a political spring cleaning was needed here. Mats Persson mentioned some independent courses that he did not like. Johan Pehrson could perhaps, in the same meddlesome spirit, take that reasoning further and, here in the chamber today, clarify which courses in Mittuniversitetet's education catalog he does not like and which should be removed by next year.

I went through the catalog myself a bit quickly before the debate. Does he think the distance learning program Web Development, which trains web developers, a professional group that the labor market is now crying out for, should be removed? Or should the distance education for systems developers be removed? It is the same thing there. Or does Pehrson see problems with the independent courses in computer science and electronics?

It is clear, at least, that million-dollar savings await Mittuniversitetet next year, as well as in the years after that. It is a fact that, just as we have heard, there will be less higher education in Jämtland and Västernorrland with the government's budget. There will be less higher education, while the need for well-educated labor is glaring. There will be poorer opportunities for people to retrain in the middle of life to take the new jobs that are emerging, not least linked to the green transition. It will be a bigger step for a person for whom it is not an option to break up and leave family and home to begin higher studies somewhere else if the opportunities for distance education decrease, which is indeed the government's stated ambition.

It is possible that the Minister and the Government are correct in that there are distance education programs that do not meet the standard. That can absolutely be the case, just as there are campus-based programs that do not meet the standard. The point is, of course, Madam Speaker, that all education in our country should be of high quality. But quality does not come through cuts. Then you only get cuts.

Or does Johan Pehrson seriously mean that the million-dollar savings at Mittuniversitetet that we are now expecting in some way can contribute to improving the supply of skills in Jämtland and Västernorrland? In that case, it would be very interesting to know how that is going to happen.

(Applause)

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

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Linus Sköld, for the opportunity for this important interpellation debate with the Minister for Education!

As Linus Sköld points out, fewer will be able to educate themselves despite the needs being greater. Peder Björk also very rightly points out that it will be 40 million less.

Right now in Västerbotten, the green industrial transition is underway. At the same time, Northvolt has laid off over 1,000 employees. Many other companies have also issued notices of layoffs in the wake of this. These are people who have come from all over Sweden and the whole world to a region with an extremely large skills shortage, where all companies, municipalities, and regions are crying out for labor: Come here and work for us!

But one also needs to have the right education. LTU and Umeå University are planning to start special courses so that those who might be laid off from Northvolt can enter a retraining program and work at LKAB, Vattenfall, Stegra - formerly H2 Green Steel -, the municipalities or the regions.

Will the universities have the opportunity to contribute to the transition, Johan Pehrson? That is a fairly easy, concrete and direct question. Will the universities receive the funds needed to be able to contribute to strengthening the competence in northern Sweden?

(Applause)

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Linus Sköld, for the opportunity to debate this issue today!

I want to dwell primarily on one thing in Education Minister Johan Pehrson's answer to Linus Sköld's question: campus-based education. I think it has been brought forward more and more since the change of Education Minister. During this short time, there has been quite a lot of talk about campus-based education.

What I want to highlight is perspective and what the minister sees campus-based education to be. Just as the Social Democrats who have been at the rostrum earlier today have spoken about, campus-based education can look very different. Decentralized education is actually campus education. Campus education is conducted at different campuses and higher education institutions all around our country.

I would like to know if the Minister for Education shares the view that we Social Democrats have on education conducted at learning centers, such as at Campus Värnamo, which I visited last week. There, education for preschool teachers and nurses is conducted, but there are also short courses in sustainable leadership in crisis and change. Are leadership courses conducted remotely but with campus-based training counted as campus-based education? Is education for 3D technicians that provides a higher education degree considered qualitative campus education? Most often, we do not get those answers in the debate.

We Social Democrats want education to be close to the citizens, close to people who need to educate themselves. I come from Jönköpings län. We have the fifth lowest educational background in the country. Even so, we are located in the middle of southern Sweden where, with short distances, there should be all the opportunities to get to different educational institutions. Despite that, my home county ranks fifth lowest in the country when it comes to higher education.

At the same time, we have an industry that is in fourth or fifth place among the export counties in all of Sweden. This shows that our potential is enormous. But it also shows the concerns regarding future technological development. If the county is to be able to continue contributing to Swedish competitiveness, the companies need to fill the competence gap for both everyone who is in the middle of working life and everyone who stands outside of working life, which Linus Sköld's question also concerns. How do we ensure that those who are unemployed actually get into work? And how do we ensure that they are educated to be able to take that work near where they live? I believe that is where the key lies.

When the ceiling is redefined and reprioritized, there is a great risk that there will be fewer places in campus-based programs far from the institution's main location. That is actually the great concern. Therefore, it is important that we discuss it. Because then the government cannot hide behind the fact that it is the institutions that prioritize how study places are located. The direction from the government is clear. It is not possible to interpret two years of right-wing rule in any other way than that study places far from the institution locations, preferably university towns, are inferior study places.

Therefore, I want Johan Pehrson to continue to reflect on and discuss whether the learning centers, the decentralized educations, are included in the concept of campus-based education.

(Applause)

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

Utbildningsministern Johan Pehrson (L)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for the questions.

For me, it is important that we believe in the colleges and universities we have and that we secure their autonomy when it comes to delivering what is expected after the steering instruments that we are now discussing.

The purpose of the redistribution is to strengthen the drivers for a high-quality educational offering, precisely in order to provide the labor market with the competence needed in areas such as STEM and also many other areas. Therefore, the proposed change, which involves cuts, is based on certain programs with low activity and low throughput as well as on the extent of independent courses. This concerns primarily independent distance courses in areas where it is not judged that a corresponding shortage exists on the labor market, which has been up for discussion here.

The reduction has also made it possible for investments in increased compensation amounts within nature and technology. It is a permanent investment amounting to over 300 million kronor. The quality initiative has been shared by all educational institutions that have nature and technology. For us, it is important to strengthen quality, and we clearly prioritize exactly this.

Distance education and decentralized educational environments are important to, for example, enable further education and for students to be able to combine both work and family life with studies, which has also been pointed out here. At the same time, high-quality distance education places great demands on both pedagogy and technical solutions.

That almost half of those who take a standalone course at a distance do not complete the course is a warning signal that we must take most seriously. It points to some kind of quality problem. When the students do not complete their studies in the courses, they simply learn less and the higher education institution, in terms of funding, does not receive the compensation it would have received if the students had completed their studies.

We also want to safeguard quality and the range of education, that is to say that the higher education institutions have good conditions to expand education that can provide the labor market with the competence that is needed. I also included that in the answer, not least regarding resources and needs during the time of transition. But it is also about giving students an education of high quality that prepares them for the upcoming working life. For that, priorities are required. Then we choose higher quality over more places with lower quality.

Madam Speaker! It is precisely the completion rate within independent courses at a distance that is the problem. There is no general throughput problem for distance students. The completion rate within program education at a distance is actually equivalent to that on campus, in the range of 75-90 percent. I would wish it were even higher. I assume that the interpellor and the co-interpellors also do.

It is therefore up to colleges and universities to manage this increased focus on quality and to ensure that the throughput is good. In that regard, distance education also plays a major role, of course.

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Madam Speaker! I want to begin by noting that Johan Pehrson did not answer my questions, that is, how many fewer places he expects there will be in 2025 and which educations it is that will be scaled down or abolished.

We received a clue. It was low throughput. We know that these funds are to be invested in engineering education and that cuts are to be made on low-quality education. That is what Johan Pehrson says. The only measure we get on what it should be is, therefore, low throughput, low performance rate, as the minister said.

Then I would like to ask the Minister what the throughput is like in the engineering programs that are to be financed through this redistribution. What is the throughput and the graduation rate for them? It is a relevant question in this context.

I think that it is actually two changes we are debating here. One is the redistribution of the ceiling amounts, which we have touched upon in depth. The other is the change in the price tags, the compensation that the educational institutions receive per student.

Two such [events/occurrences] take place this year. One was announced in the 2024 budget, and the other was announced in the 2025 budget.

The one announced in the 2024 budget concerns nature and technology educations. The price tag has an increase of just under 1,000 kronor for full-time students. What is announced in this year's budget implies an increase of just over 1,000 kronor for students within humanities or social science educations, but it does not apply to full-time students but to full-year performances.

I would like to hear Johan Pehrson justify the difference in these funding models. The natural science and technology programs receive an increase for admitting students, while in humanities and social sciences, one receives an increase when graduating students. Why does Johan Pehrson make a distinction in how one strengthens the funding of humanities and social sciences versus natural science and technology? I cannot see any reason why there should be any difference between these two areas.

Finally, I have a question that I also think Johan Pehrson should answer. Do we need more or fewer educational places in times of increasing unemployment? We expect that unemployment will continue to increase next year. Will we need more or fewer educational places in Sweden then? The question is extremely relevant. According to the policy that the government pursues, there will be fewer. If Johan Pehrson now answers "more," he has a homework assignment to do.

How many fewer places will there be? Which educations are to be scaled down? Why is there a difference in how the compensation is increased? And in times of unemployment: Are more or fewer educational places needed?

It is a number of quite simple questions that I think Johan Pehrson should answer.

(Applause)

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

Peder Björk (S)

Madam Speaker! Two weeks ago, the Minister for Education and I debated a similar issue here in an interpellation debate. Later that same week, I attended Mittuniversitetets årshögtid. It was an occasion to celebrate the achievements made at the university, with the awarding of new doctors and the installation of new professors. It was a wonderfully pleasant event.

I have attended several such events previously, and there was one thing that was different this year. There was a buzz around this when I spoke with representatives from the university, business representatives, and others who participated at the year-end festivities. There was a deep concern about what is happening with Swedish university education and the consequences of the cuts that the SD-government is now making.

I heard the Minister for Education say "quality" very many times earlier. It was quality here and quality there. But in what way does the quality in Swedish higher education and university teaching become better by reducing the number of educational places across the whole country? In what way does the quality become better by people being denied the opportunity to change careers in the middle of life or develop their skills in other ways?

The Minister for Education is still indebted to me for an answer regarding what we should say to those who now do not get such a chance. What does the Minister for Education think we should say to the business community when they wonder from there why there are not more educational places?

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

Kalle Olsson (S)

Madam Speaker! I can only confirm Peder Björk's picture. The concern, indeed the agitation, is palpable regarding the cuts that are now occurring, not least in our part of the country. Mittuniversitet is one of the big losers when the government cuts within Högskolesverige. At Mittuniversitetet, people are now talking about how to handle the cuts. Among other things, they are to invest more in increasing the number of international fee-paying students.

One cannot, Madam Speaker, ignore the irony in such a scenario: an SD-led government pushing forward a development where more foreigners are to study at our universities while fewer Swedes are provided space. If Johan Pehrson sees no problems with that, one could wonder if Jimmie Åkesson is equally satisfied with such a development. But that is a parenthesis in this context.

The regrettable thing here, Madam Speaker, is that in a time when virtually everyone – municipalities, companies, and individuals – is demanding more opportunities for skills development and more paths to transition, the government is cutting back on higher education. It is a harmful policy. It is a policy that runs completely counter to the growth agenda that the government says it advocates for.

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

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! One might ask what the SD government's level of ambition is. What is the ambition? Is it that we should continue at the bottom of the EU when it comes to growth, or that we should have the highest unemployment among all EU countries?

Sweden has throughout the ages competed with the rest of the world by being at the forefront. Now we need more educational places, not fewer. The differences in the country are very large. In some parts, the unemployment is very high. At the same time, we have an extreme skills shortage, particularly in northern Sweden.

Can you match this up, Johan Pehrson? Does the government have any ambition? Will LTU and Umeå University have the opportunity to take care of those from Northvolt who might be laid off? It is a simple and concrete question.

What ambitions are there? Will the universities have the means to carry out transition measures to meet the skills shortage?

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

Niklas Sigvardsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Regarding the question of how the Minister views campus-based and campus-located education, I promise that the Minister will be able to answer that in the future. That must become an interpellation debate regarding that specific question. It is, after all, more important to delve into the question of what constitutes high-quality teaching and education at a higher level.

When I visited Värnamo, I could see on-site in the classroom people sitting in Oskarshamn and in Hultsfred taking part in the teaching being conducted in Värnamo. They were not solitary students in front of a computer screen, but students sat in a context with staff around them. In this way, they were given part of the teaching and studies at another location. This is a fantastic opportunity we have in our country, and we will discuss this further.

I do not think I will ask new questions, because one of the three questions that Linus Sköld asked the minister really deserves for us to delve further into it. It is about how one views such as full-year students, and the price tag for them, and full-year performance. The construction for the latter is different. The government makes a clear prioritization there. It is not possible to interpret the government's use of price tag in any other way.

If there is anything the Minister should focus his answer on in the next statement, it is to answer Linus Sköld's question on how he views that the technical educations should be paid per full-time student while for students in humanities, social sciences and similar, payment should be per full-year performance.

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

Utbildningsministern Johan Pehrson (L)

Madam Speaker! We receive important testimonies from across our beautiful country about how important education is. Education begins somewhere in preschool. It will then become a ten-year primary school – finally, one could say. Education continues in upper secondary school. One then aims for higher education, but not just that. I receive questions here about what we should do for people who risk becoming unemployed or have become so. For them, there are amounts of education beyond that which is offered at colleges and universities in the form of higher education.

I am also asked what the ambition is. The answer is that it is high. I am asked how many places there will be and what changes this entails. We are clear that larger investments in natural sciences and technology are needed. Both Umeå University and LTU were mentioned, and they are very happy about this forward-looking approach. It is a matter of necessary competence that is lacking in Sweden today for us to be able to manage the green transition in an industrial nation. This is what we are working on.

I want to reiterate that there are amounts of distance education that have good throughput and a focus on being part of a more unified education. I ask to return to the replacement model we are looking at to better match the labor market's and not least the companies' needs with the people who choose to educate themselves very offensively with the unique and strong support for further education in the middle of life that the transition support entails in Sweden. It is a fantastic opportunity.

It would be presumptuous to point out exactly what every college and university should prioritize. They must decide that themselves. They are not sitting in a vacuum. They have intensive cooperation with the region, the municipalities, and the business community in the area to see what it is one needs education for. They have amounts of collaborations, and it is up to them to prioritize.

I too would have wished that we had had money for education for everyone all the time. What we are pointing out is that the throughput is a problem. I received a question about the engineering education. It is also too poor. That is why we are making this special initiative. That it looks different compared to humanities is completely correct.

Why do we do this then? Well, because Sweden is in desperate need of people who can help manage the continued industrialization and the entire green transition. This is a priority. We know that more teacher-led education is needed there. Even within the humanities in a broad sense, teacher-led education was needed. Wherever I go, people say that there is too little teaching. Now we are making a reinforcement to get more teacher-led education. I think that is good. I hear that you want even more educations that one can apply for, but the risk is that it continues to be a bit too low quality and too low throughput.

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

Linus Sköld (S)

Madam Speaker! Johan Pehrson just said that the quality measure used for the cuts, that is, low throughput, is used to redistribute to other education programs that also have low throughput. The reasoning does not quite add up. Johan Pehrson is still answerable - why is there a difference between, on one hand, nature and technology and, on the other hand, humanities and social sciences when it comes to how the funds are distributed? If the answer had been that it happens based on throughput, we would have received the crystal-clear answer that the engineering programs should have the same type of performance-based funding. But that cannot be what it is about. Why is there a difference between, on one hand, humanities and social sciences and, on the other hand, nature and technology in how the calculation of the price tag is made? Johan Pehrson is still answerable.

I still have not heard Johan Pehrson say how many fewer education places there will be in 2025. Does Johan Pehrson not think it is relevant to make such an analysis? Is it not interesting to know what access the population, with an increased proportion of unemployed, has to places in higher education? Do we need more or fewer education places in times of increased unemployment?

I do not hear Johan Pehrson answering the questions we are asking. I do not really know what it is Johan Pehrson is trying to say. What is it Johan Pehrson wants to achieve with the changes he is implementing? There is no analysis of what the outcome will be. He cannot say which educations it should be cut back on, only that those that have low throughput should be reduced in favor of other education that also has low throughput.

Please, Johan Pehrson! Answer my questions now! How many fewer places does he expect there to be in 2025? Which educations are it that are going to decrease?

(Applause)

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

Utbildningsministern Johan Pehrson (L)

Madam Speaker! Autonomy! There must be conditions for authorities to make their own decisions in accordance with the budget that is allocated and the laws we enact in this chamber. It must be up to the authorities to make the decisions themselves. I will never – unlike a tendency that perhaps exists – go around pointing and telling them exactly what they should do because I have understood what is good. This also changes over time. If one looks back at what colleges and universities have offered for different forms of education over the last ten years, one can see that it has varied, to say the least.

The answer to the question of what we prioritize, I almost have to spell out, it feels like. Quality is graded up and quantity is graded down. If people undergo an education and perhaps take out student loans to invest in their own future and thereby in Sweden's future, you do them a disservice if the education does not maintain the quality that the rest of the world demands. That is why this is being done.

When it comes to engineering programs, we know that the criticism is extensive regarding how difficult it is to get new students through. Why is that? Yes, because the basic level of those who have left upper secondary school is so low. Several quite high-profile principals say that we need to do something about the students' knowledge, so that they arrive more prepared for colleges and universities to continue their studies. That is another thing that we must work on in parallel. But on-site, we must help those who are taking an engineering program to absorb the education, because they are needed. They are crucial for us to be able to develop the business sector in northern Sweden, central Sweden, and southern Sweden. There is no other way.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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