糖心Vlog

Sweden drops language of competition

Robert Appelbaum on the war of words that preceded the withdrawal of plans to privatise universities

Published on
November 14, 2013
Last updated
May 27, 2015

At the end of October, Sweden鈥檚 centre-right government decided to withdraw a proposal to privatise the country鈥檚 universities.

Details of the plans had been circulated to get feedback from universities, and it was hoped that they would pass into law by July 2014.

However, the government is going back to the drawing board, and many working in higher education are, for now at least, breathing a sigh of relief.

There is no doubt that such a聽change in the status of universities would have a real impact on people鈥檚 lives, but the battle that has taken place has also been one of words.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

Among supporters of privatisation, the bill has been discussed in terms of 鈥渁utonomy-reform鈥; among detractors, the talk has been about 鈥渂usinessification鈥.

The government, a minority coalition headed by the Moderate Party leader Fredrik Reinfeldt, argued that universities needed this 鈥渞eform鈥 because they were now 鈥済lobal players鈥 facing 鈥渋ncreasingly fierce competition鈥.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

They needed to be 鈥渁gile鈥 in聽order to 鈥渃onduct business abroad鈥 and to enter into 鈥渃onsortia鈥, it said.

As 鈥渟eparate legal entities鈥, universities would be able to 鈥渆nter into contracts鈥eceive and manage donations, own companies and build their own financial resources鈥.

The plan鈥檚 detractors invoked a very different kind of language.

In an open letter to a leading newspaper, Dagens Nyheter, 36聽academics argued that universities were a 鈥渃ommon, public affair鈥, and ought to remain so.

As for the impact of globalisation, the authors of the letter pointed out that universities thrive in a 鈥渦niversal sphere鈥 of聽鈥渋nternational knowledge鈥.

The government鈥檚 proposals would create 鈥渓imited holding companies鈥 and thus undermine the integrity of universities鈥 work and the role they play in democracy, as well as jeopardising 鈥渇reedom of expression鈥.

I know which choice of language I聽prefer 鈥 the latter. But in the arguments of both camps, something is left unsaid.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

On the face of it, Swedish universities perform at a very high standard and are well funded and run, so it is not clear what the government is panicking about.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

But it is also true that Swedish universities as chartered today face restrictions that many of the world鈥檚 leading institutions do聽not.

For example, public universities in Sweden cannot own property because they are deemed to be owned by the state.

Underpinning the language used by the government is the ideology of neoliberalism, complete with the usual calls for the reduction of public functions and hysteria about the future.

The responses of academics, meanwhile, have been couched in聽terms of Swedish socialism.

But this has had little bearing on the withdrawal of the proposal.

The plans were pulled because, under close scrutiny, they were found to be clearly unworkable.

The proposed legislation would make universities autonomous but uncapitalised entities run at the whim of central government. It聽would grant them autonomy without autonomy.

The government has vowed to revise and resubmit its plans. By the time those are ready, however, the government is likely to be out of office. In the next general election, in September 2014, the anti-privatisation Social Democrats are predicted to prevail.

糖心Vlog

ADVERTISEMENT

Register to continue

Why register?

  • Registration is free and only takes a moment
  • Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
  • Sign up for our newsletter
Please
or
to read this article.

Sponsored

Featured jobs

See all jobs
ADVERTISEMENT