Response to interpellations 2023/24:750, 751 and 754 on the principle of public access in independent schools
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
L argues that the principle of public access already applies in schools run by public providers 1. L emphasizes that the government is conducting a careful review of proposals for a transparency principle for independent schools 1. L wants to see the principle of public access in all schools as it is a cornerstone of democracy 2. L argues that the government wants to increase transparency in the independent school sector to audit that tax money is used correctly 3. MP wants to abolish the market school and demands the principle of public access for all schools to ensure transparency in how tax money is used 4. MP considers secrecy in a publicly funded system to be harmful and unfair 5. V considers it strange that two parallel school systems have different rules for the principle of public access 6. S argues that the Liberals are ambivalent and will never allow the principle of public access in independent schools 7. S considers that the Liberals change their position depending on whether they are wearing the "party hat" or the "government hat" 8.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Speakers (13)
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Madam Speaker! Camilla Hansén and Linus Sköld have asked me how I intend to act to introduce the principle of public access in independent schools. Daniel Riazat has asked me how I intend to act to introduce the principle of public access broadly in Swedish schools, including independent schools.
The principle of public access already applies today in schools run by public principals.
The school information inquiry has been tasked, among other things, with identifying and analyzing the advantages and disadvantages of introducing the principle of public access in independent schools to resolve the availability of school information, as well as investigating and proposing how a principle of transparency can be designed for independent schools, preschools, after-school centers, and private providers of municipal adult education on contract.
The investigation has now submitted its proposals. We have begun work on a careful review of the investigation's proposals and discussion in the Government Offices and with the parties that are part of the Tidö agreement.
We will send out the report for consultation, and I look forward to receiving the views of the consulting bodies.
Camilla Hansén (MP)
Madam Speaker! During an exciting week - when the Education Committee adjusted its report on general school issues, which among other things dealt with motions on the principle of public access for independent schools, which we then debated here in the chamber and voted on - questions were raised about where the government stands regarding the principle of public access in the school system.
When we look at the different parties' support for the principle of public access, we can see that there is a majority here in the Riksdag after the Liberals just that week put their foot down and changed their position. Now it is said that they want the principle of public access to be introduced. But the outcome of the vote still was not an announcement to the government to accelerate the process. Otherwise, it would have been a clear signal from the majority that still exists in the chamber. It was the united opposition that jointly had a reservation and demanded this.
As a government party and responsible for the Ministry of Education, the Liberals of course have sharper tools to act quickly than we opposition parties in the Riksdag do. Therefore, I want to know how the Minister for Education intends to proceed in order to introduce the principle of public access for all schools, and above all, I want to see a timetable for when this will take place.
Part of the market's logic is trade secrets. In competitive situations, it is not strange that one wants to keep the recipe for success secret, but in a publicly funded education system, it is not only strange but also harmful and unfair. There is no reason not to immediately ensure that the principle of public access shall apply to all schools in Sweden.
In Sweden, we have a long tradition of openness and transparency when it comes to the exercise of public authority and public activities. Schools engage in the exercise of public authority, and they manage large amounts of tax money. It is therefore completely unreasonable that independent schools are not fully covered by the principle of public access.
What does the market school do to our education system? When profit distribution is the purpose, public statistics are called trade secrets, and school fees and school choice are tearing Sweden as a knowledge nation apart.
Miljöpartiet has always welcomed independent schools run without profit, perhaps based on an alternative pedagogy or as small local schools in rural areas and archipelagos. We note that such things are sometimes cited as an excuse for not being able to uphold the principle of public access in smaller operations. There are plenty of small operations in the public sector that manage very well to uphold the principle of public access. We do not see that these schools should have lower requirements in any way when they are publicly funded actors. The principle of public access is a requirement that one must be able to live up to regardless of size.
The support for the principle of public access to apply to all schools is therefore great. It is important that new legislation is put in place as quickly as possible. The process has already dragged on. We have made a decision to extend the transitional legislation, which is to fill the gap that has arisen regarding public access to information in the school system.
I wish that the Minister for Education elaborates on her answer regarding how she will act so that the principle of public access can be introduced as soon as possible, for example with a timetable for when the bill should be submitted and when legislation that provides fair conditions regarding openness and excludes secrecy with reference to trade secrets can begin to apply. How will this proceed and, above all, when can it happen?
Linus Sköld (S)
Madam Speaker! "Being able to obtain information about, for example, the finances and quality of independent schools is not only important for students and parents, but also for trust. Citizens, parents, and students should be secure in knowing that they have access to the same school information, regardless of whether it is a municipal or independent school. The principle of public access is a cornerstone of Sweden's democratic system of government. The principle implies that everyone has the right to access public documents. It should also mean that the public has the right to insight into and access to information on how all schools use our tax money. It will also facilitate for journalists who scrutinize the shortcomings of independent schools. The owners' interest cannot, and must not, be allowed to weigh more heavily than the public's right to see where the tax money goes."
This could have been the beginning of my speech today, but it is not. It is a direct quote of what Lotta Edholm, Johan Pehrson and Fredrik Malm wrote in Expressen Debatt on April 11 this year. The description of the problem that I have is in all respects the same as the one that Lotta Edholm, Johan Pehrson and Fredrik Malm express in their debate article. That description of the problem has carried the Social Democrats in the free school debate for a very long time.
This dates back to 2013, when a cross-bloc free school agreement was concluded that the principle of public access should be introduced in independent schools. Since then, the level of conflict has gradually increased in this issue. The Liberals have, in their own words, championed a naive view of the free school sector together with the rest of the bourgeoisie and the Sverigedemokraterna and rejected all proposals to introduce the principle of public access that have passed through this chamber since then.
Therefore, for all of us who believe that the principle of public access belongs in the independent school sector, it was a positive announcement when Johan Pehrson – the day after Fredrik Malm had voted no to the principle of public access in the committee – said in the media: Yes, we are going to have the principle of public access in independent schools. On April 11, as mentioned, Johan Pehrson confirmed this together with Fredrik Malm and Lotta Edholm. The following week, the Liberals in the Riksdag voted no to the introduction of the principle of public access, largely with reference to waiting for the report that the investigation was to deliver – I believe it happened the day after we had the vote or on the same day.
But the truth is that there is already a completed preparatory document for legislating on the principle of public access. It has been finished since 2019. Lotta Edholm has the opportunity to place it on the Riksdag's table. She does not need to wait for any referral process. She does not need to await a referral to the Council of Legislation. She simply needs to do nothing other than submit a government bill with a proposal to introduce the principle of public access in independent schools. It could be decided within a few months.
Lotta Edholm! When will we see the bill on introducing the principle of public access in independent schools?
Daniel Riazat (V)
Madam Speaker! I also intend to speak about the very important issue that the Green Party and the Social Democrats have raised in their speeches. We live in a country where we have a unique independent school system, something that the Minister for Education himself has noted. We live in a country where the market school, which has taken hold since 30 years ago, makes it harder for smaller schools, idea-driven schools, and public schools to conduct their operations with equality and equity in focus. We live in a country with an unfair school funding system where we cannot request basic documents from school actors and school companies that receive up to 100 percent of their funding from the taxpayers.
At the same time, we also live in a society where it is incredibly easy to contact a court and ask which verdict was the result of a trial and what decisions the judges and lay judges made. We can contact the Government Offices and request documents on very large issues – more accurately, we could do that before this government came to power; now, government documents are often marked as confidential. We still live in a society where the principle of public access has been something sacred and a large part of the entire democratic foundation.
Then the question is: If one as a citizen or journalist can contact the Government Offices and obtain documents regarding the highest decision-making state power, and if one can obtain documents from our courts, which make incredibly important decisions about people's lives regarding punishment or freedom, why then should this not be possible when it concerns the most fundamental, namely our children's education system, so that journalists can scrutinize whether the school corporations are acting correctly or not with the funds they receive, so that one can check what the situation is with the qualifications among the teachers, and so that one can check whether this system works or not?
With the information we already have, we can state that the era of the market school is over and that it is non-functional. But this is still about a fundamental democratic right for Sweden and its citizens. All the students, journalists, parents and others who want to should be able to take part in it.
From the beginning, the bourgeois side justified its opposition to this by saying that small independent schools would not be able to manage it. Curiously, those who organize many small independent schools have themselves come out and said: Please, introduce the principle of public access! The teachers' union stands united in wanting to see the principle of public access. There is, as far as I know, not a single instance, possibly except for certain school groups, that considers that one should not have this.
On April 11, the Liberals came out and said that they wanted the principle of public access. On April 12, they changed their minds here in the Riksdag when we had the debate. On April 24, they voted no to the principle of public access with reference to the investigation that has been submitted. When are we going to see Lotta Edholm prioritize this issue? Today marks exactly two months since the investigation was submitted. When can we expect a proposal on the principle of public access? Will the minister do as she did with the gender identity law and cooperate with the opposition to get an important issue through?
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Madam Speaker! This is a very important issue. I welcome the discussion. We must increase transparency in the independent schools (friskolor). It is important so that we can, for example, audit and monitor how our public funds are used. Being able to obtain information about, for example, the independent schools' finances and quality is important not only for students and parents but also for the trust in the entire system. Conducting education within the school system actually means that one manages the society's trust.
Parallel to the need for increased transparency in independent schools, there are challenges regarding access to school information. The background is that Statistics Sweden (SCB) changed its practice in 2019. SCB then made the assessment that data on, for example, student throughput, grade points, and student composition at an independent school constitute data on the operator's financial conditions; these would thus be covered by statistical confidentiality. This meant that such data on individual operators' activities could no longer be released from SCB or from Skolverkets statistics units to be used in Skolverkets other activities.
The consequence was that Skolverket could not publish information about schools - the information that students and guardians need in order to be able to make an informed choice of school. Nor could Skolverket use the information for evaluations, which are so important, or for the distribution of state grants and so on.
Now there is a time-limited secrecy-breaking provision in the public access and secrecy legislation, which I believe Linus Sköld among others touched upon, which ensures that guardians, students, municipalities, authorities and others get access to necessary information. But that is naturally not enough. The time-limited secrecy-breaking provision will, in fact, cease to apply on July 1, 2026. A long-term solution is needed that satisfies both of these requirements - it is about increased transparency but also about solving the issue of school information.
The School Information Inquiry has been tasked with submitting proposals for two long-term solutions to ensure access to school information regarding independent operations. One option is to make the principle of public access applicable in, among other things, independent preschools and schools. That solution implies that private principals are equated with authorities, just as the interpellants have touched upon. The second option is to build up a new collection organization at Skolverket, outside of such operations where statistical confidentiality applies. The purpose is then that such information as the interpellants are seeking can be made public.
This is therefore included, together with a lot of other important proposals that the School Information Inquiry submitted on April 18.
Increasing transparency in independent schools and solving access to school information is one of the pieces in the complete renovation that the government has now begun. Taken together, it concerns the biggest changes in the independent school system that have ever been made. I really look forward to continuing to work on these issues. We will carefully analyze the various proposals of the School Information Inquiry. Then, the proposals will eventually be referred out.
Camilla Hansén (MP)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, the Minister for Education and the other interpellants, for putting us on the spot regarding the actually quite long history surrounding this matter.
My question to the Minister for Education was therefore: How will this be done and, above all, when? The process of referring investigations, I believe we all here in the chamber are familiar with. What is important now is the timetable.
We in Miljöpartiet are therefore concerned about dismantling the market school and giving schools, students, and parents fair conditions. It is of the utmost importance that we all in our roles as parents, voters, and citizens – it is also about journalistic scrutiny and supervision – have insight into how different school providers use their resources. Or, Madam Speaker, perhaps I should say: how different school actors use our resources. It is our tax money that is intended to finance education for our children and youth here in Sweden.
So far in this debate, the Minister for Education has not shown the majority, which we know exists, that is in favor of a principle of publicity on how this should proceed as soon as possible.
The final report has, as previously mentioned, not yet been referred. This naturally raises questions: Why? Is the government missing something in the investigation? Is there something that they are not satisfied with, which is problematic? Are there deficiencies? Does one want to refer something more or something else?
Madam Speaker! I would, for example, like to hear the Minister for Education elaborate on what it does to a fair education system when certain actors that are fully publicly funded operate fully according to the principle of public access, while other operations with broader organizations and perhaps also broader funding could, in theory, keep certain parts of their activities secret.
My question is: Is the nut to crack if one wants to go straight for a principle of public access, or if one wants to go for a principle of transparency, which still does not give us the insight that we would need in the school sector?
The questions regarding the pace of the reform have not been answered by the Minister for Education, so they remain. I still want to know: When will the investigation be referred? What does the timetable look like regarding the referral to the Council of State? When will a government bill be submitted? When can we debate it in the chamber? When can the Speaker bang the gavel on the table, so that we know what will happen moving forward?
Linus Sköld (S)
Madam Speaker! On April 11, Lotta Edholm said in Expressen: It is obvious that the independent school system must be completely renovated from the ground up. One part of this complete renovation is requirements for increased transparency, and the Liberals have now landed on the position that the principle of public access should apply in all independent schools. It is crucial so that we can audit and monitor how our public funds are used.
You have not provided the text that Lotta Edholm wrote in Expressen. Please provide the Swedish text you would like me to translate.
Today, Lotta Edholm stands here in the speaker's chair and says that we should increase transparency in the independent schools (friskolor). She does not use the concept of "introducing the principle of public access" in the same clear way as she did in Expressen on April 11.
I imagine that it is connected to the ambivalence that the Liberals have felt regarding this issue for a long time. As late as when the supplementary directive to the investigation that delivered its final report, which we have touched upon several times during the debate, was to be given, the entire preparatory material for the principle of public access was to be thrown in the wastebasket—that which the investigation had produced until then. It was basically finished. After pressure, Lotta Edholm changed her mind and let the investigation submit proposals regarding the principle of public access in friskolor in any case. But it was after a tough debate and hard pressure from all of Skolsverige that it became that way.
Then it is a coincidence that looks like an event. It was only some weeks before the final report was submitted that Lotta Edholm was this harsh on Expressen's debate page.
Those who have tried to debate this with representatives from the other Tidö parties understand that the result of this investigation and Lotta Edholm's slow preparation will not be a proposal regarding the principle of public access in independent schools. The other Tidö parties will never allow that.
That Lotta Edholm is writing a debate article in Expressen which she feels compelled to sign as a party board member in Liberalerna instead of as school minister is a clear sign that there is a lot of fuss and little work.
That is the case with the entire regulation of the free school sector. The proposals that Lotta Edholm boasts about and says will become the biggest renovation of this system since it was introduced are not that far-reaching. They will be proposals that fit the corporations like a glove. Requirements for capital will only be met by large corporations. A profit distribution ban for the first three years will not be a problem for the large corporations. That one introduces a principle of transparency, as it stands in the Tidö Agreement and which seems to be Lotta Edholm's line as minister, is exactly what Academedia's CEO has been out in the media and demanding.
Lotta Edholm says today that one of the pieces in this complete renovation of the school system is to increase transparency in the independent schools. I would like to say that it means that Lotta Edholm today has issued the statement that there will be no principle of public access in the independent schools.
Daniel Riazat (V)
Madam Speaker! In Lotta Edholm's first contribution, she mentioned that the principle of public access already applies to municipal schools and that they must hand over the information that is needed. Is it not incredibly strange that we have two parallel school systems, where one school is subject to the principle of public access and must hand over all information while a school in another parallel system, or parallel society, does not need to hand over this information?
What happens when we are not allowed to access these figures? What happens is that facts become something we have to guess at rather than having them in black and white. What happens is that troll factories, for example, can spread information that is incorrect, and because we are not allowed to obtain figures that we should easily be able to obtain from these independent schools, this incorrect information becomes difficult to counter.
The Liberals are for the principle of public access one day, but now, two months later, one does not even dare to mention the word. I wonder if there are more questions within the school area where Lotta Edholm has changed her mind in the last two months.
The truth is that the Liberals and also other parts of the government have been out and talking about abolishing new public management. It has been talked about that we need to have a more equal and just school system with regulated teaching time. Could Lotta Edholm give us an answer today on which points she has changed her mind on during the last two months and why?
Another reason why the principle of public access would have been very good is that one could have scrutinized whether private school corporations have in some way contacted the Minister for Education. She herself belonged to the school corporations until the day she became minister, or even after she became minister. We could then have found out if contacts have taken place between these parties for the purpose of preventing the principle of public access. We would have found out if there are actors within Swedish business who have been involved in this. Could it be for that reason the government does not at any cost want to introduce the principle of public access?
I still think, however, that Lotta Edholm and Liberalerna should be given a chance, or a third or a fourth chance, to introduce the principle of public access. The first time it was prevented from being implemented was when they cooperated with the S- and MP-government for a couple of parliamentary terms ago. After that, they did not want to include it in the investigation that has now been presented, but after pressure from various actors, they were forced to change their minds. Then, they voted no to the principle of public access one and a half months ago.
It is okay - fourth time lucky. We give the Liberals another chance to change their minds.
I can also promise one thing: The Liberals may have managed to get into the EU Parliament by the skin of their teeth. But it will not happen in the next parliamentary election if nothing happens in the area of independent schools and market schools so that the principle of public access is introduced. I will see to that.
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Madam Speaker! Thank you for all the contributions in this important debate!
In the report from the School Information Inquiry, there are proposals on how one could design a principle of transparency for, among other things, independent schools. The report also contains a section where the advantages and disadvantages of introducing the principle of public access specifically in independent schools have been identified.
The investigation has also conducted analyses of what the various proposals could have for consequences. For example, assessments have been made of the administrative work for small, medium-sized, and large principals for both transparency aspects and the principle of public access. The basis is very important as we now analyze the different proposals that exist.
It is also no secret that my party Liberalerna wants to see a principle of public access in all schools. We believe that it is a proven piece of legislation that would be simplest to introduce. The principle of public access is also a cornerstone of Sweden's democratic system of government.
The principle means that everyone has the right to access public documents, and it should also mean that the public has the right to insight and access to information on how all schools in Sweden use our tax funds. If it were done in that way, one would also in one stroke solve the problem of access to school information.
At the same time, it is naturally the case that we are in a government, and that government is now discussing together within the framework of the Tidö agreement which path is the best to take. That work is ongoing right now, and I simply ask to be allowed to return to exactly how this will be designed. It will take a bit longer than we can debate here in the chamber.
Camilla Hansén (MP)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, the Minister for Education, for the debate! Just as the Minister for Education says, this is an important issue, and we need to be able to scrutinize the school system because the actors there manage the public's trust. For the Green Party, an important part of developing the school system and dismantling the unhealthy market school is that the principle of public access applies fully and on equal terms for public and private school providers.
I believe we would have had a completely different debate here in the chamber if we had met the party board member Lotta Edholm from the Liberals. I imagine how we would then have had a conversation about how we can achieve legislation on the principle of public access in the fastest and best way. Now we are debating as is with the government's school minister, and then the questions are left unanswered.
We in Miljöpartiet understand that market logic involves trade secrets, as those who compete want to keep the recipe for success secret. But in our education system, the recipes for success should be shared with as many as possible. In a publicly funded education system, secrecy is not only strange; it is also harmful and unfair. We see no reason not to immediately reintroduce the principle of public access in all schools in Sweden.
I understand, however, from today's debate, that this is no longer self-evident and that the timeline is highly unclear. SCB's analyses of how they handle their legislation are of course important, but we need to be able to solve these problems in a permanent way, and it is urgent.
I now understand that the reform urgency in this issue is not as high as it is in other of the Tidöre Government's prioritized issues.
Linus Sköld (S)
Madam Speaker! In line with Camilla Hansén, I would like to thank the Minister for Education for the opportunity to have this debate.
Daniel Riazat asked if there could be more questions where the Liberals have one position as a party and another as government representatives. I have actually encountered one such. After the 2022/23 turn of the year, I had an interpellation debate with the Minister for Equality regarding the existence of religious free schools. The Liberals had just released a debate article on Expressen's debate page and said that they were taking a firm stand and indeed wanted to ban religious free schools. When I asked that question to the Minister for Equality, her phrasing was: "But I stand here with the government hat on."
Depending on which hat the Minister for Equality is wearing for the day, it seems that one either accepts religious independent schools or is against them.
I think it was a striking formulation, because it seems to be exactly the same for Lotta Edholm. Depending on whether she is wearing her party hat or her government hat, she is for or against the introduction of the principle of public access in independent schools.
I can only regret this. When the Liberal Party wants to work together, there is a united opposition from the Center Party to the Left Party, and there is a common reservation in the committee regarding the introduction of the principle of public access in independent schools. Reach out to us. We will work together. The bill has been ready since the Löfven I government – when Gustav Fridolin was the Minister of Education. It is only a matter of acting. We will help.
Daniel Riazat (V)
Madam Speaker! I will not stand here at the rostrum for long, but it is nevertheless interesting what time we find ourselves in.
When it comes to introducing search zones, which have the purpose of subjecting people in certain areas to searches, one is incredibly quick to produce legislative proposals and to introduce the zones.
When it comes to introducing an inhuman asylum and refugee policy, the Liberals can agree to almost anything, at almost any time and as quickly as possible.
When it comes to introducing cuts in the Swedish school system, it also goes incredibly fast. Budget after budget is presented where the municipalities are to be punished. Especially in municipalities where the largest cities are located, and where the red-greens are in power, the municipalities shall be punished for wanting to invest in the Swedish school.
When it comes to focusing solely on repressive measures in our society, it does not take long. Investigations proceed as quickly as possible, and legislative proposals are ready at the Government Offices.
But when it comes to the most fundamental question, information on what is happening in the Swedish school system, that Lotta Edholm's friends within the free school corporations are not up to any mischief, which we already know they are, in order for us to know that the taxpayers' money for the Swedish school system goes to the students, and not to anything else, then it suddenly takes time. Then the Government Offices must wait for additional preparatory documents and this and that.
Can we get an admission from the rostrum, Lotta Edholm, that this has only been a game from the Liberals, that is to say that one does not want to use the principle of public access?
Statsrådet Lotta Edholm (L)
Madam Speaker! Once again, I would like to thank you for many contributions in this debate.
Now there is a solid basis for making decisions. There are well-designed consequence assessments, and we are preparing the various proposals in the Government Offices. This is being done entirely in accordance with the laws. It is not the case that the government can proceed faster or slower than what the legislation says.
When I listen to the debate, it seems to me that it is considered that the government would not take the issue seriously, that we would not be interested in increasing transparency in the free school sector. Nothing could be more wrong. We must ensure that there is better transparency than today, but there are different paths to take.
The government considers that we must increase transparency. It is crucial for being able to audit that, for example, tax funds go to what they are intended for, that we can obtain information on teacher density and so on. It is an incredibly important issue, but I cannot say today exactly how we will land on the issue. It is simply not fully prepared yet. I also think it is important to say that the transparency in the Swedish independent school system must increase significantly compared to how it looks today.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.