2024-05-162023/24:UbU10 · p.2UbUEducation
Political parties in schools
Political parties' access to schools
What's at stake: School visits give political parties and their youth wings a channel to reach young people, and proponents argue that the share of young people who are politically active within parties is declining; the outcome affects whether all parliamentary parties are guaranteed access to schools or whether individual principals can continue to exclude some or all parties.
Case texts and AI reasoning are AI-translated from the Swedish originals; the Swedish text is authoritative.
What the vote decides
The question was whether the Education Act should be changed so that principals are required to invite all parties represented in parliament, regional and municipal councils to schools, or whether the current system, in which the principal alone decides whether and which parties are invited, is sufficiently well balanced.
Yes Yes — the committee proposal
The Committee points to existing rules on political information in schools, which give schools clear guidelines for action when they choose, as part of their democracy mission, to invite political parties, and considers the rules well balanced; the Committee therefore rejects the motions calling for the rules to be changed.
No No — the reservations
Reservation 5 (S, V, MP)
The Social Democrats, the Left Party and the Green Party argue that the school's current rules, under which the principal alone decides whether political parties are invited at all, damage democracy and young people's chances of getting to know the parties; they want the Education Act changed so that all parties represented in parliament and in regional or municipal councils are guaranteed the opportunity to visit schools.
Summarised from the committee report. Party labels in the summary come from the report, not from the vote.
What do the votes mean here?
Yes The committee proposal: rejecting the motions (keeping things as they are).
No Backing the counter-proposal: reservation 5 by S, V, MP.
Abstain The party marks a position of its own that is not one of the two final alternatives.
What each plan points to — and how the party voted
For each party: the vote its own election manifesto and party programme point to in this case, next to how the party actually voted. A plan can only point to Yes or No; a party can also abstain.
| Plan | Vote | Confidence | Evidence | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V | Yes | No 0/19/0/5 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| S | Yes | No 0/93/0/13 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| MP | Yes | No 0/13/0/5 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| C | Yes | Yes 19/0/0/5 | follows the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| L | No | Yes 12/0/0/4 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| KD | No | Yes 14/0/0/5 | departs from the plan | confidence: medium | derived |
| M | No | Yes 59/0/0/9 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| SD | No | Yes 61/0/0/11 | departs from the plan | confidence: medium | not addressed |
Committee proposal
The Riksdag rejects the motions 2023/24:1671 by Alexandra Völker and Azadeh Rojhan (both S) demand 2 and 2023/24:1717 by Camilla Brunsberg (M).
Original (Swedish)
Riksdagen avslår motionerna 2023/24:1671 av Alexandra Völker och Azadeh Rojhan (båda S) yrkande 2 och 2023/24:1717 av Camilla Brunsberg (M).
Riksdag decision: The Riksdag rejected approximately 130 proposals in motions concerning fundamental questions about education from the general motion period in 2023. The proposals dealt with, for example, schools' value foundations, safety and academic order in schools, grades and assessment, educational materials and school libraries. The Riksdag referred to, among other things, current regulations and that work is already underway in the areas covered by the motions.
Counter-proposals
- The counter-proposal wants municipalities to develop preventive measures against violence through normative critical work in preschools, schools, after-school activities, and sports. (S, V, MP) — Reservation 5
Plan vs actual vote
Every party, in chamber order: what its own plan pointed to, how it voted, and the reasoning behind both. Highlighted rows are where the two differ — but a vote that follows the plan is a result too, so the reasoning is there for every party.
The plan says nothing about party visits to schools.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan says nothing about party visits to schools. The nearest principle is that school is democratic infrastructure that should be built on trust in the profession rather than detailed control from above, and that authoritarian right-wing forces should be actively countered. A statutory guarantee forcing every school to accept all parliamentary and municipal parties does not follow from these commitments. The position is uncertain.
Original (Swedish)
Planen säger inget om partibesök i skolan. Den närmast liggande principen är att skolan är demokratisk infrastruktur som ska byggas på tillit till professionen snarare än detaljstyrning uppifrån, och att auktoritära högerkrafter aktivt ska mötas. En lagstadgad garanti som tvingar varje skola att ta emot samtliga riksdags- och fullmäktigepartier följer inte av dessa åtaganden. Ställningstagandet är osäkert.
- trust in the professiondecisive»Tillit till kunskapen och engagemanget hos dem som gör« (party programme ↗)“Trust in the knowledge and commitment of those who do”
- school's broad mandate»Vi vill se en skola med ett brett uppdrag« (party programme ↗)“We want to see a school with a broad mandate”
- defense against authoritarian forces»Vi ser det som avgörande att stärka hbtqia+-personers rättigheter i en« (party programme ↗)“We consider it crucial to strengthen LGBTQIA+ people's rights in a”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan does not address school visits by political parties.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan does not address school visits by political parties. The nearest lying principle is partly that school shall be a study environment free from racism and xenophobia, partly the election manifesto's explicit commitment never to participate in giving power to a party that does not stand up for all people's equal worth. A statutory guarantee for all Riksdag-represented parties to visit schools removes the school's own ability to make that assessment, which the plan does not support.
Original (Swedish)
Planen behandlar inte skolbesök av politiska partier. Den närmast liggande principen är dels att skolan ska vara en studiemiljö fri från rasism och främlingsfientlighet, dels valmanifestets uttryckliga åtagande att aldrig medverka till att ge makt åt ett parti som inte står upp för alla människors lika värde. En lagstadgad garanti för samtliga riksdagsrepresenterade partier att besöka skolor tar bort skolans egen möjlighet att göra den avvägningen, vilket planen inte ger stöd för.
- never give power to SDdecisive»Socialdemokraterna kommer aldrig att medverka till att ge makt åt Sverigedemokraterna, ett parti som inte står upp för alla människors lika värde och rätt.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“The social democrats will never participate in giving power to the Sweden Democrats, a party that does not stand up for all people's equal worth and rights.”
- school environment free from racism»I vårt samhälle finns också rasistiska strukturer, som begränsar vissa människors liv« (party programme ↗)“In our society there are also racist structures, which limit certain people's lives”
- the profession's authority in school»Lärare och annan personal i skolan ska omedelbart kunna ingripa vid stök och oro.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Teachers and other staff in school shall be able to intervene immediately in disruption and disorder.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan lacks commitment to legislate about parties' access to schools.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan lacks commitment to legislate about parties' access to schools. The nearest lying principles point the other way: decisions should be taken as close to those affected as possible, and school is described as an advertisement-free place where politics should not detail-control activities. A national guarantee that deprives the school of the assessment therefore does not align with the plan.
Original (Swedish)
Planen saknar åtagande om att lagstifta om partiers tillträde till skolor. De närmast liggande principerna pekar åt andra hållet: beslut ska tas så nära dem som berörs som möjligt, och skolan beskrivs som en reklamfri plats där politiken inte ska detaljstyra verksamheten. En nationell garanti som fråntar skolan bedömningen ligger därför inte i linje med planen.
- decentralized decision-makingdecisive»Beslut bör tas så nära medborgarna som möjligt.« (party programme ↗)“Decisions should be taken as close to citizens as possible.”
- school free from campaigns»Skolan ska vara en reklamfri plats.« (party programme ↗)“School shall be an advertisement-free place.”
- politics shall not detail-control schools»Politikens uppgift är att skapa förutsättningar för« (party programme ↗)“Politics' task is to create conditions for”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan contains no commitment to guarantee political parties access to schools by law.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan contains no commitment to guarantee political parties access to schools by law. The party programme instead states that legislation and regulations must provide great freedom to locally solve the school's task and that decisions concerning a local level should not be moved upward. Based on the decentralist principle, the plan leads to the demand being rejected, even though the party simultaneously wants to care for and develop liberal democracy further.
Original (Swedish)
Planen innehåller inget åtagande om att i lag garantera politiska partier tillträde till skolor. Partiprogrammet slår i stället fast att lagstiftning och regelverk ska ge stor frihet att lokalt lösa skolans uppgift och att beslut som rör en lokal nivå inte bör flyttas uppåt. Utifrån den decentralistiska principen leder planen till att kravet avvisas, även om partiet samtidigt vill vårda och vidareutveckla den liberala demokratin.
- local freedom in schooldecisive»Lagstiftning och regelverk måste erbjuda stor frihet« (party programme ↗)“Legislation and regulations must offer great freedom”
- decisions close to people»Beslut som endast berör en mer lokal nivå, eller bara individen själv, bör inte flyttas upp till en högre nivå,« (party programme ↗)“Decisions that only concern a more local level, or only the individual themselves, should not be moved up to a higher level,”
- protect liberal democracy»Den liberala demokratin får aldrig tas för given. Den ska vårdas, värnas och vidareutvecklas — idag och för kommande generationer.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Liberal democracy must never be taken for granted. It must be cared for, protected and developed further — today and for future generations.”
The plan does not directly address the question of party visits in school, but states that democracy must be explained and won for new generations and that democratic dialogue presupposes active citizens.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan does not directly address the question of party visits in school, but states that democracy must be explained and won for new generations and that democratic dialogue presupposes active citizens. From this follows support for parties sitting in elected assemblies being able to meet students. The plan's demand for schooling free from separatist influence is a qualification, not an obstacle, because the counter-proposal concerns democratically elected parties.
Original (Swedish)
Planen behandlar inte frågan om partibesök i skolan direkt, men slår fast att demokratin måste förklaras och vinnas för nya generationer och att det demokratiska samtalet förutsätter aktiva medborgare. Av detta följer stöd för att partier som sitter i folkvalda församlingar ska kunna möta eleverna. Planens krav på en skolgång fri från separatistisk påverkan är en kvalificering, inte ett hinder, eftersom motförslaget avser demokratiskt valda partier.
- democracy must be won anewdecisive»Den svenska demokratin och våra medborgerliga rättigheter måste förklaras och vinnas för nya generationer.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Swedish democracy and our civil rights must be explained and won for new generations.”
- living democratic dialogue»Demokratin förutsätter aktiva medborgare och ett levande demokratiskt samtal.« (party programme ↗)“Democracy presupposes active citizens and a living democratic dialogue.”
- free debate as democracy's foundation»Demokratins livsluft är att fler granskar, diskuterar och pekar ut samhällets brister.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Democracy's lifeblood is that more examine, discuss and point out society's shortcomings.”
- school free from separatists»värna en skolgång fri från separatistisk påverkan« (2022 manifesto ↗)“protect schooling free from separatist influence”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The party programme gives the school an explicit democracy mission and requires that the school is an environment that permits different opinions.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The party programme gives the school an explicit democracy mission and requires that the school is an environment that permits different opinions. That parties represented in elected assemblies are guaranteed the opportunity to meet students follows from that mission and from the requirement that students' knowledge of democracy be developed. The plan does not, however, discuss the principal's decision-making authority as such.
Original (Swedish)
Principprogrammet ger skolan ett uttalat demokratiuppdrag och kräver att skolan är en miljö som tillåter olika åsikter. Att partier representerade i folkvalda församlingar garanteras möjlighet att möta eleverna följer av det uppdraget och av kravet att elevernas kunskaper om demokratin utvecklas. Planen talar däremot inte om rektorns beslutanderätt som sådan.
- the school as a democratic environmentdecisive»en demokratisk miljö som tillåter olika åsikter och visar« (party programme ↗)“a democratic environment that permits different opinions and demonstrates”
- the school's democracy mission»ett deltagande i demokratin. För det krävs att elevernas« (party programme ↗)“participation in democracy. For this to happen, students'”
- strong freedom of expression protection»Ett starkt skydd för yttrande- och meddelarfriheten« (party programme ↗)“Strong protection for freedom of expression and information”
- continuous involvement»deltagande, inflytande och delaktighet, inte bara vid« (party programme ↗)“participation, influence and involvement, not only at”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan says nothing about party visits to schools.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan says nothing about party visits to schools. Closest lies the ideology programme's defence of a living political life, informed citizens and rejection of opinion corridors. Based on these principles, the plan speaks for that elected parties should be able to meet the students rather than the matter being entirely decided by a single principal. However, the basis is weak and the conclusion derived.
Original (Swedish)
Planen säger ingenting om partibesök i skolan. Närmast ligger idéprogrammets försvar av ett levande politiskt liv, informerade medborgare och avvisandet av åsiktskorridorer. Utifrån dessa principer talar planen för att folkvalda partier ska kunna möta eleverna snarare än att frågan helt avgörs av en enskild rektor. Underlaget är dock svagt och slutsatsen härledd.
- living political lifedecisive»Sverige ska ha ett levande politiskt liv, där människors samhällsengagemang kan komma till uttryck på lokal, nationell« (party programme ↗)“Sweden shall have a living political life, where people's civic engagement can be expressed at local, national”
- no opinion corridors»Alternativet är censur, diskriminering och åsiktskorridorer.« (party programme ↗)“The alternative is censorship, discrimination and opinion corridors.”
- informed citizens»En stark demokrati bygger på informerade« (party programme ↗)“A strong democracy is built on informed”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan makes free and value-independent opinion formation a central democracy issue and notes that free debate is hampered by structures and politics.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan makes free and value-independent opinion formation a central democracy issue and notes that free debate is hampered by structures and politics. A guaranteed possibility for all elected parties to visit schools follows from that principle, since it removes an arbitrary obstacle to young people's gathering of information. The plan does not explicitly address school rules, so the conclusion is derived.
Original (Swedish)
Planen gör fri och värdeoberoende åsiktsbildning till en central demokratifråga och konstaterar att den fria debatten hämmas av strukturer och politik. En garanterad möjlighet för alla folkvalda partier att besöka skolor följer av den principen, eftersom den tar bort ett godtyckligt hinder för ungas informationsinhämtning. Planen behandlar inte skolans regelverk uttryckligen, så slutsatsen är härledd.
- free opinion formationdecisive»Stärka möjligheten till fri och värdeoberoende åsiktsbildning« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Strengthen the possibility of free and value-independent opinion formation”
- diversity of perspectives»En fri debatt och åsiktsbildning som präglas av transparens och mångfald av perspektiv i såväl traditionella som nya medier, hämmas av strukturer och politik.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“A free debate and opinion formation characterized by transparency and diversity of perspectives in both traditional and new media is hampered by structures and politics.”
- strengthened democratic participation»Möjligheterna att stärka inslag av direktdemokrati ska utgöra ett komplement till den representativa demokratin.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“The possibilities to strengthen elements of direct democracy shall constitute a complement to representative democracy.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
Share and embed
Sources and documents
- The committee report on riksdagen.se (2023/24:UbU10)
- Committee report full text (HB01UbU10)
- Per-MP voting data (API)
- Case status (API)
Documents under consideration
- Motion 2023/24:1008 — Trygga rum för alla av Daniel Vencu Velasquez Castro (S)
- Motion 2023/24:1036 — Nollvision mot mobbning av Anna Wallentheim (S)
- Motion 2023/24:1049 — Pornografins skadeverkningar av Roland Utbult (KD)
- Motion 2023/24:1051 — Skolavslutningar och firanden av högtider med konfessionella inslag i kyrkolokaler av Ingemar Kihlström (KD)
- Motion 2023/24:1164 — Nationell gemenskap i skolan av Staffan Eklöf (SD)
- Motion 2023/24:119 — Totalförsvarskunskap i skolan av Eric Palmqvist (SD)
- Motion 2023/24:12 — Införande av svenskt kulturarv och hembygdskunskap i läroplanen av Björn Tidland (SD)
- Motion 2023/24:1200 — Betyg utan utslagning i skolan av Jim Svensk Larm (S)
- Motion 2023/24:1332 — Undervisa om folkmordet seyfo 1915 av Denis Begic och Ingela Nylund Watz (båda S)
- Motion 2023/24:1396 — Ingen plats för hederskultur i ett demokratiskt och jämställt samhälle av Ann-Sofie Alm (M)
- Motion 2023/24:1430 — Likvärdig skola med nationella prov för den anpassade skolan av Ann-Sofie Lifvenhage (M)
- Motion 2023/24:1460 — Förändringar i läroplanen av Markus Wiechel och Alexander Christiansson (båda SD)
- Motion 2023/24:1462 — En samhällsförberedande skola av Markus Wiechel och Alexander Christiansson (båda SD)
- Motion 2023/24:1494 — Skolbibliotek av Gunilla Carlsson och Mattias Jonsson (båda S)
- Motion 2023/24:1524 — Politik för de nationella minoriteterna av Amanda Lind m.fl. (MP)
- Motion 2023/24:1573 — Allmänt fritidshem och lovverksamhet för barn av Adnan Dibrani m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2023/24:1592 — F som betyg i grundskolan av Sofia Skönnbrink m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2023/24:1671 — Stärkt demokrati av Alexandra Völker och Azadeh Rojhan (båda S)
- Motion 2023/24:1717 — Politiska ungdomsförbund av Camilla Brunsberg (M)
- Motion 2023/24:1721 — Ungdomsförbund i skolan av Teresa Carvalho m.fl. (S)
Source: The Swedish Parliament