Response to interpellation 2025/26:124 on the identification exemption for English-language schools
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
L assesses that there may be reasons to review the regulation for English-language teaching 1 2 3 4. L believes that the government is working on extensive reforms and investments in schools 2 3 and trusts that S will vote for these reforms to strengthen Swedish schools 4. L considers that it is now time to move from words to action 4. L emphasizes that the principals are responsible for ensuring that the education follows the Education Act 3. S considers that the government's response is characterized by passivity and that the ambition to abolish the licensing exemption has blown away 5 6. S wants an investigation to be appointed immediately to abolish the exemption 6 7 as equality requires that all teachers have a Swedish teaching license 7.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)
Mr. Speaker! Niklas Sigvardsson has asked me how I intend to act to abolish the identification exemption for schools that conduct teaching in English.
In order to be permitted to organize instruction in English, requirements are set, among others, that the instruction shall maintain good quality and that students shall receive sufficient knowledge in Swedish to achieve the goals of the education. According to the Education Act, teachers who teach in English shall have a license and qualification or a foreign teacher education that corresponds to a Swedish teacher degree and competence to teach in the language.
The Swedish Schools Inspectorate's review of the quality of English-language teaching, published in the autumn of 2025, shows that the teaching at most of the reviewed schools can be improved. At many schools, there is a lack of knowledge on how the language and the subject should be taught simultaneously. This is very concerning, as the skills in the Swedish language are crucial for developing knowledge in all subjects and, in the long run, for being able to participate actively in social life.
We know that knowledge results need to increase in Sweden and that skilled teachers are the single most important factor for the teaching to maintain high quality and for the children's and students' learning. Against the background of the quality deficiencies that have occurred and that the number of schools with permission to conduct parts of the teaching in English has increased sharply since the regulations were introduced, there may be reason to review the regulation. I may return to how a potential review of the regulatory framework shall proceed.
Niklas Sigvardsson (S)
Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for Education for the answer, although it is with both some surprise and some frustration that I receive the answer to my interpellation. In the Minister's answer, we are, in fact, met with a remarkable passivity.
The Minister expressed precisely in the response that there may be reasons to review the regulation and that the Minister may come back regarding how such a review might be taken forward. There may be, and she can come back. It is a stance that stands in sharp contrast to the decisiveness that the Minister has tried to express throughout the entire autumn.
We could read in, for example, Dagens Nyheter on September 25 that the minister said as follows: It is fundamental that teachers should be able to speak Swedish and have a Swedish teacher's license. One should not be able to deceive parents and students with an international profile, especially if the teaching does not meet the standard. It is not fair to the students.
These are words that suggest an immediate change. They are words that signal political will and a clear direction, but when we in the Riksdag today receive the government's response and formal stance, the ambition is blown away.
Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats have been clear. During the autumn, we have submitted motions, and we have previously submitted committee initiatives in the Education Committee – actually as recently as just a few weeks ago. This was an initiative that could have made it possible to create a majority here in the chamber to abolish the exemption. This committee initiative was, however, not only voted down by the Tidö parties, of which the Liberals are a part, but they even voted no to beginning the preparation of the issue.
If the liberal Minister of Education had really meant what she said in the media over the last few months, she could have ensured that the Liberals actually worked to abolish the exception within English-language teaching. Therefore, the question must be asked as to why this proposal was voted down when it was previously stated that one was in favor of ensuring that certification shall apply to the entire Swedish school system.
One could have joined us. One could have ensured a majority in this chamber, but one chose to vote no. This is remarkable given that the Skolinspektionen's review that the minister brought up in his answer was so clear: 27 of 30 inspected schools showed deficiencies.
The exception was supposed to apply to a very limited part of the Swedish school system. From 2011, when there were only 16 primary schools with permission, it has grown to today's 145 schools that have an exception to conduct this type of teaching. It has therefore not been a small exception in a limited part of the school system, but it has grown into something much larger.
Mr. Speaker! The Minister and I seem to agree on one thing, namely that the Swedish language shall be the main language in Swedish schools. That is precisely why the passivity in the government's response becomes both frustrating and difficult to understand. Therefore, I want to ask the Minister for Education: What is it that makes the Minister, given the answer she just gave, appear to have shifted on the question of abolishing the identification exemption?
Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)
Mr. Speaker! A well-functioning school is the foundation for more people to have the opportunity for a good future.
International studies show that Swedish students' knowledge results have fallen in recent years. There is much that is good about Swedish school, but also much that can be improved. School should be a place where students develop new knowledge both in language and in other subjects, and that is why it is important that the teaching maintains high quality.
It is sad that the member claims that the government is sitting idle. The school is, in fact, one of the government's primary priorities, and the government is working with many and extensive measures to improve Swedish schools. Proposals are now being prepared for, among other things, a new curriculum, new grading systems, increased safety and study environments, a new support system, a regulation of time for teaching, and increased quality in teacher training. These are just some of all the reforms that are underway.
I say it again: We share the assessment that there may be reasons to review the current regulations. An amendment of such regulations needs to be preceded by a careful analysis in an investigation, and I may return to how a potential review of the regulatory framework should proceed. But the claim that the government is passive towards the school and is doing nothing is the exact opposite of the truth. The government's primary priority is the school because it is crucial for all children in this country to get a fair start in life.
Niklas Sigvardsson (S)
Mr. Speaker! We have seen the passivity both in the response to my interpellation and in the interpellation debate we have just heard regarding banning limited companies in schools. The Minister shows no hint at all of wanting to do anything here and now, neither when it comes to banning limited companies in schools nor when it comes to taking a stand to abolish the identification exemption for English-language schools.
It is obvious that all types of legislation should be preceded by a thorough analysis. An investigation shall produce proposals, and the proposals shall be referred. We are in complete agreement there, but one does need to act and actually appoint an investigation so that we can abolish the identification exemption for English-speaking schools. It is therefore the first on the priority list: Appoint an investigation that even makes this possible!
This could have been expedited. If the government and the Liberals had needed help in the Government Offices to appoint an inquiry, the Chamber could have announced to the government that it should take the initiative to abolish the identification exemption. That was what our committee's initiative in the Education Committee was about.
When it comes to why this is urgent, I want to return to the School Inspectorate's review, which shows that 27 out of 30 schools were judged to have quality problems. That is the reality; that is how it looks.
The School Inspectorate pointed out, among other things, that teachers at these schools may lack both pedagogical competence and basic subject-didactic ability regarding conducting language- and subject-integrated learning. They also pointed out that despite legal requirements, students are not given sufficient opportunities to develop their knowledge in the Swedish language and that schools may fail to ensure progression in knowledge development because the language and the subject are not integrated in a satisfactory way.
This is serious because we want the competence and knowledge in Swedish schools to increase. We want Swedish students to come out with even better knowledge in the future. Therefore, these are things we need to take seriously, and we need to take them seriously now.
The review also shows that this is not just a problem in schools' internal work, but that it is a structural problem for students' equality and language development. It is therefore why we Social Democrats want to ensure that this is accelerated – that an investigation is commissioned to be able to abolish the exception regarding Swedish teacher certification.
I return to what the minister said in Dagens Nyheter earlier this autumn, namely that it is fundamental that teachers should speak Swedish and have a Swedish teacher's license. In light of that statement, it is important to actually ensure that we get started with that work, and I do not think the answer the minister gives is satisfactory when it comes to just that point, Mr. Speaker. If it is fundamental that teachers should both speak Swedish and have a Swedish teacher's license, the question is why an inquiry is not being appointed.
Our line is clear: Equality in school presupposes equal requirements. There should not be a parallel system where the Swedish license is voluntary. If the Minister is serious with that rhetoric, we expect a clear answer, and we can agree to ensure that the change becomes a reality. Students, teachers, and the quality of the school must not be risked in this way. The government needs to act, not hesitate.
I therefore still wonder: Is there anything that makes the Liberals and the Minister for Education have changed their position and do not want to appoint the investigation that will actually be needed in order for the identification exemption to be abolished?
Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)
Mr. Speaker! I completely share the assessment that there may be reasons to review the regulations on English-language teaching, but I do not share the member's assessment that the government is doing too little. The government proposes historical investments in schools in the coming years, and right now, several extensive changes and reforms in Swedish schools are being prepared.
There are already today requirements that teachers who teach English must have a teacher education that corresponds to a Swedish teacher degree and the competence to teach English. The school owners are responsible for ensuring that the education is carried out in accordance with the existing regulations. It is important that the school owners take responsibility for ensuring that all children receive an education designed according to the requirements set in the Swedish Education Act and other regulations.
It is pleasing that the member brings up Skolinspektionen as a good example. I agree that Skolinspektionen has an important mission to inspect principals, schools, and other activities. The purpose is, among other things, to ensure that all children and students receive an equal education of good quality and in a safe environment.
It is also important that the Swedish Schools Inspectorate is given the right conditions in its mission to carry out such reviews. In order for the authority to be able to increase its presence, the government has, among other things, ensured that it can conduct more inspections, for example through unannounced visits. We have done this by strengthening the authority's operations. During the mandate period, the government has, among other things, reinforced the Swedish Schools Inspectorate's review activities with a total of 25 million kronor for 2024 and 47 million for 2025. The review activities are also expected to be further strengthened.
All of this is ultimately about ensuring that all children have the right to a high-quality education. Again: The Member of Parliament is trying to paint a conflict here, but I share the assessment that there may be reasons to review the regulations. I may also have to return to how it should be done.
Niklas Sigvardsson (S)
Mr. Speaker! It seems obviously to be a conflict in this issue given that the answer is so vague and floating. We Social Democrats want to ensure that this becomes a reality here and now. This exception, which in 2011 concerned 16 schools, today concerns 145 schools and involves a significant increase in the number of students attending such a type of school.
We Social Democrats want Swedish students to have good schools, that it should be a given that the teachers who teach there shall have qualifications and certification and that they shall be able to conduct teaching in the language that the school says they should do. They shall be competent in Swedish but apparently need to be it in English as well in order to be able to conduct teaching in these schools.
We Social Democrats are clear: There is a simple and reasonable responsibility to take in this issue. Those who teach in Swedish schools shall have a Swedish teacher's license. This applies in all schools, regardless of profile and regardless of language. Equality in school must not be built on exceptions.
Let me conclude with this: The government has used harsh words during the autumn. The Minister for Education has been tough in various proposals, but the question is whether these proposals will become reality. Will they even see the light of day in government bills, or where will they end up?
We Social Democrats stand here with clear proposals. We submit motions, and we present committee initiatives to ensure that we maintain pace and momentum in the matter. One must not fall behind. There is a difference between saying something and wanting to do something for real.
We are ready to remove the exception. We are ready to raise the quality. The question is whether the government is ready.
Utbildnings- och integrationsministern Simona Mohamsson (L)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you for the debate and thank you for the question, Niklas Sigvardsson!
I am pleased to see so many members engaged in school issues in the chamber this Monday at lunchtime. I will continue to be as clear as I can. We share the assessment that there may be reasons to review current regulations. We are likely in agreement that language is an incredibly large and important power factor for whether children get a fair start in life.
An amendment of such provisions needs to be preceded by an investigation and a careful analysis; I believe that Social Democratic members also share that view with me. I may return to how we shall conduct a review of the regulatory framework and how such an analysis and investigation shall take place.
It is pleasing to see that we share the view on the Swedish language and the importance of all children getting a fair start. I can therefore rely on the fact that when all our proposals land on the Members of Parliament's desks, the Social Democrats will ensure that they vote for the various reforms we want to implement to strengthen Swedish schools. Now it is time to move from words to action and show whether one wants conflict or if one truly wants to put schools first.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.