Kommunalisering, yay or nay? En jämförelse mellan riksdagspartiernas ställningstaganden angående kommunaliseringen av skolan 1988–1991

Abstract

During the later parts of the 20th century there occurred several changes to the Swedish public sector. These changes aimed to effectivize and decentralize the governance model in the public sector. One of these changes was the municipalization of the school system, put forward and proposed by the social democratic government in the late 1980s and early 1990s. This study aims to examine and compare that times different parliamentary parties' opinions on the municipalization of the school system. The source material consists of government bills, and in direct relation to the municipalization of the school system. The analysis has been a qualitative-comparative analysis and has examined and compared the of the parliamentary parties in relation to the municipalization. The results show that there were many questions and objections towards the governmental bills. Every parliamentary party had different opinions and propositions on how the bills could be improved but what can be concluded is that they all were in agreement that the school system needed to be more decentralized. Where most discrepancies can be seen are on the topics of: municipalization, subsidies and the ability to choose which school to attend to. The social democratic party and the leftist party were both for a municipalization of the school system. The central party was for a decentralization and did not see the municipalization as a hindrance to that goal. The social democratic party and the central party were both for a high possibility for students and parents to choose which school to attend but not the leftist party as they thought it would encourage class differences and segregation. The moderate party, the people’s party and the environmentalist party were against a municipalization of the school system. They also wanted an even more increased possibility to choose school. They also insisted upon a new school subsidy aimed to follow the individual student. This proposition was firmly criticized by the other three parties.