Adult education
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
1 L calls for approval of the proposals and argues that adult education is a tool for freedom and growth 1. L believes that education should be available throughout life, that the expansion should lead to jobs and that the system needs flexibility where the needs of the labor market are taken into account 1. L advocates for a combination of the welfare principle and the dynamics of the market economy for freedom of choice and innovation 2, as well as tougher inspections for quality 2. L considers the time limits within SFI to be reasonable 3 and that the rotavdrag creates jobs 4. L argues that new legislation is needed to correct skewed incentives 4. 5 V believes that the government prioritizes tax cuts over a well-financed adult education 5. 6 S argues that the government is implementing cuts and that the solutions are short-term bandages 6.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Speakers (14)
Fredrik Malm (L)
Madam Speaker! We shall now debate the Education Committee's report on adult education. Let me begin by moving to approve the proposals in the report.
Adult education is one of our most powerful tools for freedom, inclusion, and growth. For us Liberals, it is a fundamental principle that education should never be reserved for the years of youth. It must be there when it is needed, regardless of where one is in life. It is in adult education that the opportunity is given for a second or third attempt to study for upper secondary school competence, to change paths, to complement previous studies, or simply to get the chance to stand stronger on the labor market. It is there, with a strong adult education, that new futures take shape.
Adult education has also become a central part of Sweden's skills supply. We have a labor market in rapid change, driven by electrification, AI, climate transition and much more. At the same time, we have continued unemployment. We have companies that cannot find staff. This somewhat paradoxical situation on the Swedish labor market needs to be solved with better matching and a strong focus on skills supply. We can get a good way along with vocational adult education, komvux, and not least universities of applied sciences.
It is pleasing that the government continues to expand regional vocational adult education. In this year's budget, additional funds were added to create more places. We also see new initiatives, not least the state grant targeted at education in connection with large company establishments. It is wise policy, I believe. When northern Sweden grows, machine operators, childcare workers, plumbing technicians, and others are needed very quickly. At the same time, Madam Speaker, the expansion of the number of training places must not be synonymous with routine. It must not become storage. It must be qualified education that leads to jobs. That is the very core of why we make these investments.
We know that the longer education programs within regional vocational adult education have a high employment rate. That is where we should direct the resources – to what works.
Madam Speaker! Sweden also faces a demographic challenge. More people must be able to work longer. More people must be able to change careers in the middle of life. This requires a flexible adult education that is accessible and relevant and maintains high quality. Therefore, it is important that we now introduce better planning possibilities for the municipalities and that the labor market's needs are weighed in more clearly in the planning of adult education.
I am pleased that we Liberals have been involved in pushing for a new form of education: the national vocational education. It is now being built up as a pilot with inspiration from the university college (yrkeshögskolan) and can provide many adults with a fast track to jobs. It is an example of how we can modernize the system without having to compromise on quality.
Madam Speaker! An important part of adult education is Swedish for immigrants. There are no shortcuts to establishment and integration without the language. Many who have come to Sweden as adults need both language training and opportunities for vocational guidance. Here, we must set high quality requirements on follow-up and result orientation. It is not sufficient for people to end up in long-term educational situations without a clear path forward.
We also know that there are deficiencies in the oversight. There are trainings that do not meet the standard. It sometimes takes too long before they are phased out. There is work to be done to improve this. At the same time, I think, Madam Speaker, that it is very important to emphasize that many trainings maintain high quality. We must not paint a completely black picture of all forms of training. There is a lesson to be learned, and there are quality improvements to be made. But there are also many trainings of high quality, especially when it comes to cooperation with the labor market and strong local anchoring.
The diversity of actors within adult education is a strength. There is education under municipal management. We also have private education companies, universities of applied sciences, folk high schools, and so on. Everyone has their place in the system. It provides freedom of choice for the individual, and it enables innovation and specialization.
Madam Speaker! There is also a liberal point in this. The education system should not be too top-down or uniform. It should be characterized by diversity, accessibility, and quality. It should help people toward self-sufficiency and personal empowerment and thus also toward faith in the future. We want a society where no one is too old to start over.
Caroline Helmersson Olsson (S)
Madam Speaker! I hear Fredrik Malm speaking eloquently about the importance of education, cultivation, and skills supply. That is very good. But I wonder why the government has put the vocational adult education inquiry in the drawer, or wherever it is now lying. The proposals were presented in February last year, and the consultation period expired in June last year. What are you waiting for?
Fredrik Malm stated that some bits have been taken out of the investigation and things have been done in the ordinance. One should still give the government credit for that. But it is not about fluff and finesse, but about basic structure, predictable funding, and securing the apprenticeship positions. In last year's debate, I heard that it was very interesting, such as strengthening the support for students in adult education and, not least, moving forward and looking at studies and transition to the labor market for students in adapted education.
If the Liberals want Sweden to be a knowledge nation – I believe that is what you want – then it is about time to show it. What is happening with the investigation?
Fredrik Malm (L)
Madam Speaker! These are extremely important issues for Sweden. We have a relatively high structural unemployment. In addition, we see what is happening in the United States and elsewhere, with wars in Europe. There is much that implies very large pressures on the Swedish economy generally and also on many companies and the public sector. We also have inflation. The government tried to curb it and succeeded quite well, but it is on its way up again. In that case, the question of education and skills supply – not least through the university college, which is also an important form of education – becomes very important.
It is actually not just one investigation but three or four different investigations concerning vocational adult education, the university college, komvux, SFI and much more. The different parts are being prepared in the Government Offices. That is a part to take into account there. Many valuable comments have also been received during the referral rounds. I hope that they will reach the Riksdag.
Everything will not happen at once, but different legislative proposals will come from the government time and again moving forward. Furthermore, there will be reinforcements in the budget bill, also in the autumn budget, and hopefully in upcoming budget bills before 2026.
Madam Speaker! It is about ensuring both the quality and, to a greater extent, the connection to the needs of the labor market. This does not apply as much in the university colleges – that already exists there – but in some other parts. It is also about expanding more places, but not doing so at such a rapid pace that one cannot ensure the quality. One must also be able to invest in the educations.
There is quite a lot to look at. I foresee that more will come to the Riksdag in the future.
Caroline Helmersson Olsson (S)
Madam Speaker! Fredrik Malm seems to share my view that long-term perspective and a holistic approach are needed. There are several investigations on the table, and I truly believe that everything must be put together in one package. Therefore, I would like to ask a question to Fredrik Malm regarding the national vocational education via YH. It went very quickly to get this through. An idea was had, and the vocational college was told to carry it out, without a decree or anything similar. Does Fredrik Malm not think that this could disturb the holistic approach and long-term perspective that is needed within the area?
Fredrik Malm (L)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Caroline Helmersson Olsson, for the question!
No, I do not think so for the reason that it is a pilot project. This is being scaled up, and the advantage of that is that during the process one can see what needs to be improved, if one needs to tweak the whole thing a bit, or if it simply does not work, which probably will not be the case.
What we actually want is to move more components from the university college to other forms of education and to other ages, because the university college is a very successful form of education. It would be very good if we could make that work, but for the time being, it is happening on such a small scale here that it does not affect the whole. That is my assessment.
Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)
Madam Speaker! I agree with the statement by Member of Parliament and Chairman of the Education Committee Malm when he says that we must have training at the highest level and that we must have qualified training. It cannot be based on routine.
We have, however, seen that for example within komvux, a lot of cheating has occurred. It may have become a routine in the reporting of who has been there, how they have been audited, etcetera. One of the most telling examples that I have seen concerned people being passed without even having been in the classroom at all. They simply received their passing grade in their hands so that they could then move forward. It is also possible to pay for different grade levels. There are even criminals who have stood behind some of this.
We cannot have it this way. My question to Fredrik Malm, the Liberals, and the government is therefore quite simple. How does the government intend to act to ensure that this does not continue?
Fredrik Malm (L)
Madam Speaker! Niels Paarup-Petersen poses a rather open question but nevertheless gives concrete examples. In this case, it is a question of different forms of education which also lie at somewhat different levels. Some are private, and others are public. Some concern post-secondary studies and so on.
Generally, my starting point, Madam Speaker, is that it is very good for Sweden to combine the principle of universal welfare with the dynamics of the market economy. It is generally a good way forward for Sweden. Many of these activities are tax-funded, because we do not want elements of private financing from the individual in these forms of education – hence the principle of universal welfare. Then we have a lot of private actors who can contribute with competition, freedom of choice, innovation, and new thinking. In that case, it is very important to ensure that criminals or fortune seekers do not enter the activities.
A conclusion that we in the Liberals have drawn is that tougher inspection and sharper control are required, and given the investigations that have been commissioned, the government has also drawn the same conclusion. Ultimately, it is a matter of having to be able to tear up contracts if it concerns a procured activity. If it concerns the right of freedom of establishment, one may possibly look at other forms. It becomes somewhat different depending on the organizational form.
Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)
Madam Speaker! Member Malm and I probably share the view on many of the principles. I also appreciate tougher inspections and sharper control. But my question was how one intends to act.
When the cheating at specific komvux was taken up by DN, SVT and others, the Minister for Education was asked if he intended to do anything about it. I believe it was on January 30 that he went out and showed decisiveness by announcing 7 million extra to Skolinspektionen so that there would be more audits, tougher inspections, and sharper controls. But, Madam Speaker, on April 15, less than three months later, the grant to Skolinspektionen was reduced by 10 million kronor.
If you first give 7 million for sharper controls and then take away 10 million, I wonder how that results in sharper and better controls and inspections and tougher actions against those who cheat.
Fredrik Malm (L)
Madam Speaker! First and foremost, the numerical exercise is not quite correct. But regarding the School Inspectorate, there have, for example, previously been proposals here in the chamber that the School Inspectorate should be responsible for all preschools in Sweden, even the independent ones. There, the municipality now has a supervisory responsibility. We also have a number of other school forms that the School Inspectorate is not responsible for.
I believe that one cannot simply refer to the School Inspectorate all the time. The municipalities also have a very great responsibility. It is not the School Inspectorate that is the contracting party towards a number of different actors who perhaps do not behave themselves. This chamber has a great responsibility for the legislation.
Now we are moving forward with various proposals that will in the future make the School Inspectorate sharper. For example, it is not reasonable that the School Inspectorate cannot conduct unannounced visits. A municipality can go out and ask questions to businesses within the marketplace to see if any irregularities are occurring. In the same way, the School Inspectorate should be able to act if they, for example, see if an establishment does not want to provide space for a person with a disability.
Tightened control is one thing, and resources are another. Ultimately, it is about legislation. But I still want to emphasize that we have 290 municipalities in Sweden that are accustomed to supervisory responsibilities within a number of different areas that exist in the municipal catalogue of powers. They need to get better at school inspections.
Nadja Awad (V)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Fredrik Malm, for the speech!
I have a question about SFI. Since the government and the Sweden Democrats took power, they often talk about how important it is to learn the Swedish language.
And that is exactly it. It is a prerequisite for being able to receive education and enter the labor market. Language is a prerequisite for being able to exercise one's democratic rights here in Sweden. What conditions do the government and the Sverigedemokrater provide so that people can undergo an SFI education that is equivalent across the entire country?
We know, for example, that there is a lack of statistics on how it goes for persons with disabilities who are studying SFI. They often stay in the SFI education for a long time without the disability being detected. Adult pedagogy is lacking, especially within SFI, and we have an overrepresentation of unqualified individuals. This is something that hits hard against the individual who is studying SFI and who perhaps has an NPF diagnosis such as ADHD, autism, or dyslexia.
We also have a shortage of equivalent SFI courses across the country because we have a number of different profit-driven private actors, and we have an underfunded SFI where enormous savings are being made all over the country.
My question to Fredrik Malm and the government is: What conditions for undergoing SFI training does Fredrik Malm think these individuals are given, so that they can acquire the Swedish language?
Fredrik Malm (L)
Madam Speaker! Thank you very much for the question, Nadja Awad!
There are a few different parts to this. One part is the investigation itself, which is currently being prepared in the Government Offices and which looks at much of this. I hope that a proposition on this is submitted in the near future. In addition, there are a number of starting points that I think are relevant in this context. Sfi is a part of municipal adult education, which means that there is no state principal.
In some ways, I can understand that one does not always discover if people have disabilities when they are not visible. In SFI, one does not spend the whole day with teachers and so on in the way one does in a regular education, but one attends for a few hours a week.
I think that the Swedish debate sometimes assumes that one should be able to speak Swedish after having studied at SFI, but that is not quite the case. One should be able to speak basic enough Swedish to get by. That makes me think it is not unreasonable to have certain time limits, i.e., that one is not allowed to study SFI for too long. One should study it during a period to acquire sufficient knowledge to be able to move forward and hopefully study some other form of education or enter the workforce.
Generally, the quality needs to be improved, and we need to get more qualified teachers. That is obvious. We see exactly the same problems that Vänsterpartiet sees in this.
Nadja Awad (V)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Fredrik Malm, for the answer!
I just want to object and say that it is very good that Fredrik Malm mentions that it is important for him and the government to improve the quality and get more qualified staff within SFI. But the question remains: In what way will the government and the Sweden Democrats ensure that the quality within SFI becomes better? How are we to get more qualified teachers within SFI when enormous cuts are being made all around in the municipalities' adult education?
The government has made a number of different prioritizations. They have prioritized tax cuts for the very richest, and in the latest budget, they are adding luxury-ROT for wealthy individuals' renovations of kitchens and bathrooms. That is the prioritization.
At the same time, people emphasize how important it is that we have residents in the country who can speak the language. But it is a question of creating equal conditions for these people to acquire the language. In that case, we need to have a strong welfare state, and we need to have a good adult education. Then we cannot have an underfunding of SFI, for example.
My question is: In what way shall the quality increase within SFI? In what way shall we get more qualified teachers within SFI? It is the "how" that I want to get at, not just that we can state that it is good that people learn Swedish. How shall they be able to do that when we have such vastly different conditions for it across the country?
Fredrik Malm (L)
Madam Speaker! Luxury-rot, says the Left Party. If the rot deduction had not existed, only those with very high incomes would have been able to afford to do renovations. With the rot deduction, more people get the opportunity to do so, and furthermore, some jobs are created. I can understand that it may feel strange for the Left Party to land on such conclusions – to create more jobs and give increased opportunities for ordinary people – but it is at least my opinion.
There are great differences across the country. That is how it is, and there are several reasons for that. One is that the activity is decentralized and municipalized. There is also a difference because we have municipalities in Sweden that have had a very high reception of newcomers, while other municipalities have had a lower one. People have different conditions.
I am aware of municipalities where, in different ways, they have looked more at scheduling and planning and have the operations in larger units in order to give, for example, people who work, have children, and so on, increased opportunities to undergo SFI. It must fit and work for them. In other places, it works less well.
I believe it was Niels Paarup-Petersen who, in the previous exchange, brought up actors within adult education and that people who had not participated there had nevertheless been approved. It could be that there have been incentives within, for example, SFI, such as being paid based on participation. If people do not participate, the organizer loses money and so on. There are a number of different incentives that can be a bit skewed in this system.
New legislation is to come. It is important that we raise the quality, it is important that we continue to follow this issue and it is important that more people learn Swedish faster so that they can more easily enter the labor market.
Caroline Helmersson Olsson (S)
Madam Speaker! In a time of rapid technological development, where the labor market is changing at a breakneck pace, it is not only desirable but absolutely necessary that every individual is given the opportunity to develop their competence – throughout their entire life.
Adult education is not a side branch of lifelong learning. It is a fundamental pillar of the Swedish model and a prerequisite for both security and growth.
Madam Speaker! We are in an economic crisis. I believe that many households feel this in their very bones. Unemployment is biting in at the same time as both the business sector and the public sector are sounding the alarm about a shortage of skills. There is nothing more important to debate today than adult education. It is about people's opportunity to educate themselves, to support themselves, and to be able to put food on the table for their children. It is about Sweden's future.
We have agreed in Sweden: We shall compete with knowledge, not with low wages. We shall build a society where education is the norm, where lifelong learning is a given, and where we stand strong as a knowledge nation. But I ask myself: What is the status of that agreement? Are we on track? Where are we headed?
Madam Speaker! An active labor market policy and long-term funding of adult education is more important now than ever. Nevertheless, we see that this government repeatedly misses the mark.
When Sweden needed investments in transition, we were instead met with significant cuts in the government's first budget – cuts in adult education and in labor market training, at folk high schools and even in YH, which perhaps is the most effective form of education we have.
When the criticism came, the concessions followed – in installments, every six months. For that money, the principals are to procure high-quality vocational training or scale up their own, attract applicants to positions and secure vocational teachers, APL placements and perhaps premises and machinery; what do I know. They are also to finance a portion themselves. It is not so strange that the money is not spent and is returned to the state.
Filling up bit by bit, half-year by half-year, is not long-term. It is firefighting. The government has consistently misjudged the situation. It is not building up anything sustainable, and it affects, not least, the expensive educations. How can one dare to invest in them when one does not know the long-term conditions?
How difficult can it be to understand that adult education requires planning, not makeshift solutions? The government would like to speak about temporary crises and having patience. But when the pandemic hit, there was still a clear insight into the role of education. Now we face new crises: structural unemployment, recession, and the need for transition. Is the insight there, and is the will there?
Despite the budget amendment that was tabled in the Riksdag last week, the investments in adult education are still more than half a billion below what the previous Social Democratic government spent in its final year. It is not meeting a crisis; it is ducking from it.
Madam Speaker! Almost a year ago, the referral process for the vocational adult education inquiry was completed. What has happened since then? Some things, but we are still waiting for a decision on a more long-term but also flexible model for the financing and proposals on apprenticeship models, on selection, on support in adult education – for example, special pedagogical competence – and on studies and transition to the labor market for students in adapted education. In such matters, we are waiting for answers.
There are very many good proposals in this investigation. Some of them have actually been placed on the floor of the Riksdag by the Social Democrats, and we are debating them today.
We naturally stand behind all our proposals, but I move for the approval of reservation 1 regarding competence supply and transition.
We need a reformed vocational education with increased compensation levels and long-term perspective. We need a reformed apprenticeship education for adults. We need industry schools, do you hear me!
We need to address the profit-seeking, which also exists within adult education. It was mentioned in the previous exchange. What is happening there? Instead of addressing the whole, the government has launched a pilot project for national vocational training via YH – quickly, somewhat fragmented, and without connection to the rest of the education system. A quick fix to handle the skills shortage? Yes, perhaps. But the risk is that this complicates the long-term investments in adult education that we must make across the entire country.
Several referral bodies are also critical of introducing a new form of education without conducting a consequence analysis of what it will mean for other forms of education.
The most important question for me is whether the education will be able to be built upon in lifelong learning. There are many questions but very few answers.
Madam Speaker! We must also take the next step in the dimensioning reform, which means that we are to dimension the educations based on the labor market's needs. We need a unified long-term strategy, not short-term bandages.
Sfi deserves its own debate. I look forward to taking it this autumn, when the government has signaled that it will place that bill on the Riksdag's table. I truly hope that the government has listened to the referral criticism so that the bill contains quality in sfi and not just limits.
In conclusion, I want to remind of the government's own analysis in the 2025 economic spring bill. The government states that unemployment is increasing and that employment is decreasing, especially among young people. The matching between the unemployed and available jobs is poor. The skills shortage is structural. That is the government's analysis. But if the problems are long-term, why are the solutions short-term? The path to jobs and to transition goes through education. We know that. The question is when the government will realize it.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.