Yesterday, outgoing university chancellor Lars Haikola revealed that in his forthcoming investigation he is prepared to investigate the possibilities for private funding of higher education (ID 27/5). He believes that the university needs an addition of private capital to be able to provide high-quality education.
SFS believes that the quality of higher education would rather be threatened if private financiers were admitted. We believe that good education presupposes that the academy is free from the influence of other interests. This means that the politicians who have been elected by us citizens must bear full responsibility for both the conditions and the financing of higher education. It is positive that private actors support the academy through important research funding, but the education is the basic activity in the university and must be independent, equivalent and free of charge.
Unlike Lars Haikola, we do not believe that there is a ceiling for how much Swedish taxpayers are willing to invest in higher education. We are instead convinced that education is a common interest that must be paid for with common funds. On the other hand, taxpayers demand that their money be used efficiently and go to the right purpose, which is not the case at present.
Lars Haikola is right that the university's educations are underfunded. The truth is that many Swedish universities have difficulty getting their finances together. This is mainly due to the fact that we have a system for allocating resources which means that the appropriations are constantly shrinking in relation to costs. The universities' budgets are simply leaking at the bottom and the hole is growing every year. Allowing resources to be eroded in this way is irresponsible to taxpayers, students and universities.
In other words, there is every reason to investigate the financing of higher education. Just as Lars Haikola writes himself, the most basic question is about what role the university should have in society. But if you are serious about such an issue, it is not enough to give a lone former university chancellor the task of mapping the current situation and come up with your own speculations. It would be serious to appoint a future commission with representation from both the university sector and all political parties to take a holistic approach to the academy.
In light of today's proposal, there is also reason to question Lars Haikola's suitability as an investigator. He writes that he does not want to anticipate his own investigation, but still manages to do just that. According to the directives, there is scope for proposals on how any cost increases could be financed. It is these proposals that Lars Haikola is now paving the way for, despite the fact that the investigation has not begun and despite the fact that he himself has not yet resigned as university chancellor.
If the university begins to receive private capital, it will change the general expectations of who will take responsibility for higher education. If we allow companies to start financing academic education, the step is not far to allow students themselves to participate and pay for their education. This is a path that Sweden should not take. We must adhere to the principle that higher education should always be free of charge.
Instead of calling for private capital, Lars Haikola should start right at the right end and address the causes of all the problems that the university faces. Dealing with the resource allocation system that so obviously does not work would be a good first step.