(cont. from § 12) Bicycle issues (cont. TU9)

Inga-Lill Sjöblom (S)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by moving for approval of reservation 3.

I grew up in Uppsala. It truly is a cycling city. Even though one can swear at students who cycle completely without sense, I am incredibly grateful that so many of them choose the bicycle, not least when I have to take the car myself. We would never manage the accessibility in Uppsala if it weren't for the fact that there are so many cyclists.

But even the global climate goals presuppose that many of us take the bicycle. The bicycle feels more modern than ever when the world is transitioning for the future. One could speak of a bicycle key for the climate.

Promoting the use of bicycles is therefore an issue for Uppsala Municipality, for Region Uppsala, and for us in the Riksdag. It is about relieving public transport, where the region is responsible. It is about ensuring accessibility on Uppsala's streets, where the municipality is responsible. But it is also about meeting the high climate goals in Uppsala, Sweden, the EU, and the world. The bicycle is the future but also a part of Uppsala's proud history as a cycling city.

Madam Speaker! I sometimes think that if only all of Sweden were a bit more like Uppsala. Imagine if the whole country cycled like we do. But Sweden is not like Uppsala. We are an elongated country with different conditions. We have a responsibility to stimulate cycling and increased transport efficiency across the entire country. Not least in large cities, the bicycle has great potential to relieve both car traffic on the roads and public transport.

If we can replace more trips with cycling, we can also feel better as individuals. Public health is affected by how much we move. Pedaling a bicycle is good for heart and brain, muscles and motivation. The person who cycles 15 minutes to work engages in 30 minutes of physical activity during a normal workday almost without thinking about it.

In this context, I also want to point out that both safety and capacity need to be improved for cycling to be able to increase and develop. Politics has a responsibility to drive the development in the right direction. Especially in the metropolitan regions, it is important that municipal planning is based on a regional perspective in order to facilitate bicycle commuting between neighboring municipalities. Good planning to facilitate bicycle commuting is important in all municipalities.

In summary, we want to emphasize that increased and safe cycling can contribute to reducing the environmental impact of travel and congestion in urban areas, as well as contribute to better public health. Increased cycling provides great benefits for society and the individual. The bicycle belongs to our proud history, present, and future. We politicians have a responsibility to do what we can to make it easy to choose the bicycle when it is possible.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Magnus Oscarsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Today we are debating the Committee on Transport's report on cycling issues. I would like to begin by moving to approve the committee's proposal.

Before the vote, I was inspired by my colleague Ann-Sofie Lifvenhage and her speech about when she started cycling and what color her bicycle was. I may not remember the color of my first bicycle, but I remember my first bike ride when I had learned how to turn.

Olga and Svea, the neighbors where I lived, always went out for a ride. Then I thought: Now I'm finally going to show them that I can turn. I said that I had learned, and then I rode down the hill and naturally ended up in the large roll of barbed wire. So it didn't go well at all to turn, but I actually learned that later. We all have some memory of when we started cycling.

The bicycle fulfills a very important social function and is an attractive mode of transport for short but also long distances. I live in Ödeshög in Östergötland myself. From there, it is not far to Motala, only six miles. When it comes to cycling, Motala is the true metropolis. One can say that it is the number one cycling city. We who come from Östergötland at least say that.

No one can have missed that every year it is approximately 23,000 cyclists who cycle the 315-kilometer-long Vätternrundan. I think that is absolutely fantastic. Perhaps there is someone in here who has done it – I, however, have not done it. But it does not end with this. There are also, among others, Halvvättern and Tjejvättern. Around 60,000 people are in the area in western Östergötland to cycle.

Madam Speaker! In cities - with proximity between services, workplaces and housing - the bicycle is a useful means of transport with positive effects for both public health and the environment. But it is evident that the traffic environment there is not adapted for cycling to a sufficiently high degree. While other categories of road users are affected by fewer deaths and serious accidents than before, the development is unfortunately not as favorable for cyclists. Much of this can be attributed to the fact that cycling has generally increased, but also to the fact that traffic safety knowledge is low.

Madam Speaker! Active travel in our transport system has a positive impact on both people's health and our environment. If more people were to choose walking or cycling, the positive health effects would increase further. Historically, we see this clearly.

In the 70s, over 90 percent of children walked or cycled to school. In the mid-90s, it was 77 percent. Today, it is down to 57 percent - and this in a time when children and young people are becoming increasingly sedentary. Only two out of ten children and adolescents in the Pep-report 2023 reach the recommendation and state that they have been active for at least 60 minutes every day during the last week.

This, Madam Speaker, is alarming. Lowering the threshold for everyday movement is important so that more people will get moving. All movement counts and is positive for people's health. That there are cycle paths that are safe and secure is important. In particular for children, it is a priority issue. The physical design and infrastructure are important factors that affect cycling.

Madam Speaker! Municipality by municipality, we see how pedestrian and cycle paths are being built, often in cooperation with regions. This is seen, among other places, in my home municipality of Ödeshög. We have seen how we have actually managed to get cycle path after cycle path. We can also see how one then avoids cycling on large roads with a lot of traffic.

It is clear that this is a very positive development, Madam Speaker. In this way, we can get more people to start cycling. I am therefore pleased that the government in the budget invests in improving and increasing road safety for children and young people through, among other things, the construction of new pedestrian and cycle paths. This is truly an important issue.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Anders Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! I thank you for an interesting childhood exposé. We received a similar story from the Moderates earlier. One has, as Magnus Oscarsson says, one's own memories of one's first bicycle. I had a DBS as my first bicycle - death behind the handlebars. It was a nasty piece of work - ugh, yes. But it was not this I intended to speak about.

From the member's speech, we heard about all the advantages of cycling, but we did not hear about any policy from the Christian Democrats. What do the Christian Democrats want with cycling in Sweden - for the climate, for public health, and perhaps for the wallet? The Christian Democrats hold the ministerial post. Minister Andreas Carlson is responsible for these issues. Despite that, we do not hear anything in the chamber tonight about the Christian Democrats' policy on the cycling area.

I want to give the member the opportunity to say something about what policy the Christian Democrats want to see in the cycling area.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Magnus Oscarsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! It is a very interesting question from Anders Ådahl. And we all certainly have bicycle memories from our childhood, as said. It is interesting that Member Ådahl may have written the question before he heard what I said. I actually spoke about the government allocating funds for measures to increase road safety.

This is very important. What I tried to bring up in my speech was that the more people who feel safe cycling, the more they might want to cycle themselves and have their children out cycling.

In my speech, I spoke about my home municipality Ödeshög. We have achieved something great between Ödeshög and a built-up area called Hästholmen. It is an old railway embankment. We saw immediately that many more people cycled. This is because it is an alternative to a road that may not be very heavily trafficked, but which is very unpleasant to travel on when there is a lot of traffic.

In this context, it is important to highlight that the municipalities may in some cases experience it as a bit difficult to get Trafikverket on board with this regarding pedestrian and cycle paths. I just spoke with a person from our municipality who said that it is sometimes a bit difficult. It feels a bit big to get Trafikverket on board with these thoughts. I believe that it is important that we get it.

I think this is the answer to the member's question: that we have allocated funds in our budget for traffic safety measures.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Anders Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! Traffic safety-enhancing measures, the member mentions. It is one measure. It is not ten measures or twenty measures. It is a rather small bicycle policy plan that the Christian Democrats are delivering here.

Is there anything the member can say about the bicycle's role for climate work, the bicycle's role for public health, the bicycle's role for recreation, the bicycle's role for tourism, the bicycle's role in rural areas and the bicycle's role as an intermodal means of transport?

There are quite a few more areas, I think. It was a bit lackluster to hear that the Christian Democrats only have a single small area to present.

Often in different policy areas, it is beneficial to work towards a national goal, that there is some kind of ambition expressed in a common political context, for example a decision in the Riksdag. I would therefore like to ask the member if a national goal for cycling would be something that Kristdemokraterna would want to advocate for in order to elevate the role of cycling for all the aspects that I mention.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Magnus Oscarsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Anders Ådahl, for the question!

I was probably very unclear in what I said, because I thought I mentioned several times how positive cycling is for public health. I brought up how in the 70s it was 90 percent of children who cycled. In the middle of the 90s it was 77 percent, and today it is 57 percent.

I also raised the example of tourism, for instance in Motala municipality, where there are around 60,000 people out cycling in the week before Midsummer, so I think I still managed to include a number of things.

One can always wonder if one can include more things next time. I will try to make it even more easy to understand for my next speech; I promise the members.

I also included measures to increase road safety. It must still be important that when we now invest money in the maintenance debt that exists for roads, it will mean that we can also upgrade our cycle and pedestrian paths. It is a very important measure, and I think it is something positive to highlight in the debate that we are actually doing this, because it will make a difference.

I forgot the member's question at the end. We may have to take that next time. It is very important and positive that the number of people who want to cycle in our country is increasing.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Madam Speaker! Member Mikael Oscarsson is talking about cycling and Vätternrundan. He had not cycled it himself. I have done it a couple of times. At that time, it was 30 mil long. Today it is 31.5 mil, and the reason for that is that the road network cannot handle this cycling competition.

It concerns especially the northern parts, from the Askersund section down to Motala. For safety reasons, people refrain from cycling there, and that is because Trafikverket, for one thing, does not ensure that we have roads that can accommodate cycling. It is not fun to cycle there even if it is a single bicycle, and even worse it is if there are many bicycles.

Secondly, Trafikverket cannot close the roads in a sensible way for such large events. This is the biggest thing happening in the northern part of Östergötland and the southern part of Närke in terms of tourist events, running races, and experiences.

The question to the Christian Democrats, partly directed at the Minister for Infrastructure, concerns the view on Trafikverket's work regarding making it possible to cycle on our roads. It actually concerns our country roads in general, where there is a tendency to build away the possibility of cycling. In this context, it has been arranged so that a cycling race becomes one and a half kilometers longer than it was originally.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Magnus Oscarsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Daniel Helldén, for a very important question!

First, I would like to congratulate the member for having cycled these 31.5 miles! This is not only a large cycling race in that part of western Östergötland, but it is the largest cycling race in all of Sweden. The member's question is therefore incredibly important, and it is precisely road safety that is the serious issue.

Last year I was able to meet the organizers and discuss things with them a bit. I can recommend to all of you, if you have the chance and do not cycle yourselves, to talk and discuss with the organizers, who are doing a fantastic job!

That they largely place the responsibility on guards and so on is something that Trafikverket has now partially opposed, and I know that the government is working actively to ensure that one can actually have these cycling races all around Sweden. Vätternrundan is a cycling race, Sommen runt is another, and there are more races around Sweden that have concerns with this. That Trafikverket takes measures that make it so that one can no longer organize these cycling races is something that the current government is tackling with force, because these are very important issues.

I didn't perceive if there was a direct question, but road safety is very important. That is probably the primary thing. I also know that Andreas Carlson, the minister, is working a lot to ensure that more people can be encouraged to cycle in a safe and good way.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Madam Speaker! Then I shall pose part of the question again. Vätternrundan is one thing, and it was sad that it had to be extended. There was a part in the advertising itself around this, and 30 mil is a figure that is significant for the operation. One had to redo all the documents and so on.

But the big question is really about traffic safety on our major roads, for example national road 55, where further down they have built two-plus-one roads, which means that it is practically impossible to cycle there. In many places, there are also no sensible roads to cycle on instead. They are quite winding and hilly and lengthen the whole route, so one actually ensures that cycling is worsened.

The chairman spoke about how in Ödeshög they have built cycle paths and utilized, for example, embankments and other things to build upon, which is absolutely excellent. But when Trafikverket in this way - for a well-intentioned purpose, it should be said - for the traffic safety of cars builds away the traffic safety for bicycles, it deteriorates the accessibility for this type of transport.

A mile is not much for a bicycle today. Six miles to Motala, as the member spoke about, is far, but some can cycle that distance. But in many places, the possibility no longer exists, and it is incredibly regrettable.

I have not heard anything from the Minister for Infrastructure regarding safeguarding the cycling infrastructure in our national road network in relation to what Trafikverket does when they build. Therefore, I simply wonder if Mikael Oscarsson has any idea whether the government intends to do anything in this area at all.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Magnus Oscarsson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you again, Daniel Helldén, for a very important question!

I must say that I agree with the member in this. I think exactly the same as the member: When Trafikverket builds, for example, two-plus-one roads, I think one forgets the part concerning cycling. In the case that I took up between Hästholmen and Ödeshög, where I come from, it is precisely such a two-plus-one road and there is no human being who dares to cycle on that small strip there.

I really hope that the government takes action on this, because it must be addressed. One must ensure that there is an opportunity to cycle in a traffic-safe manner in the future, so this is very important.

Someone was using the analogy of a match here earlier. I think that the government has actually only been in the match for about 15 minutes, if one imagines that a match is 90 minutes long. I am therefore not at all worried about whether there will be proposals and measures; on the contrary, I know that it is close to the minister's heart to actually get things done so that more people want to cycle and feel that they can do so in a safe way. We will return to this.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Patrik Jönsson (SD)

Madam Speaker! If we are to be nostalgic and talk about old memories, I can tell you how smart my friend and I were when we were young. We were perhaps eight years old and lived in a rental apartment building, and we were going to see who could cycle fastest around the building. It didn't work out any better than that we met from opposite sides at a corner of the building, and it became the world's crash. There were many tears that flowed there. Sometimes one wonders how smart one is!

Mr. Speaker! I would first like to say that we stand behind all of our reservations, but in order to gain time, I move for approval of only reservation 7. It concerns, among other things, a harmonization of the regulations for bicycle passages and bicycle crossings.

Mr. Speaker! I thought I would start by addressing the safety of unprotected road users, which includes the group of cyclists. Sweden is one of the world's safest countries in terms of traffic, and over the last 25 years, the statistics for those seriously injured have decreased for all types of traffic except for just cyclists. Cyclists are the group of road users where the most people are seriously injured in traffic.

When road safety is discussed, cyclists are often forgotten. In 2019, approximately 2,000 of the 3,850 seriously injured in traffic were cyclists. Of these, 150 were traveling on electric scooters, a proportion that I at least thought would be larger. A common perception is that a collision with a car or other motor vehicle is most common, but the fact is that eight out of ten accidents with seriously injured are single-vehicle accidents.

The number of fatalities fluctuates quite significantly; in 2022, there were 20 cyclists and, in addition to that, 4 who were operating an electric scooter. This is more than 10 percent of those who die in traffic in total. Operation and maintenance account for a large part of the accidents - almost half of them. One group of accidents is decreasing, however, and those are collision accidents between motor vehicles and cyclists. That is positive.

We should sharpen the efforts to reduce the number of those killed and seriously injured. The condition of the cycle paths is often a municipal responsibility, and we must make the municipalities more aware of the need to review the condition and standard of the cycle paths. We also need to make it easier to do the right thing in traffic.

An example of when laws and regulations complicate things unnecessarily is the regulatory framework regarding bicycle passage and bicycle crossing. Both cyclists and motorists are often unaware of the difference between these two different types of crossings, and we believe it would be best if the same rules applied to both bicycle passage and bicycle crossing. This is also in our reservation. The best thing would be if all bicycle crossings were simply converted into bicycle passages. Cyclists are unprotected in relation to motorists, and to reduce the frequency of accidents, we must introduce requirements that cyclists must stop and give way to motorists and other vehicles.

Therefore, a review of the coloring of cycle paths should be carried out. Coloring a cycle path can be a good way to attract attention at an intersection. But to ensure it is not confusing, we argue that the coloring should be standardized so that the color is the same in all municipalities, regardless of where in the country you are.

Furthermore, we argue that a greater responsibility should be taken by society to ensure that children learn to cycle safely in traffic. That children learn traffic etiquette at an early age is not only important – it can be a matter of life and death. Even though this is primarily the parents' responsibility, one must consider that not everyone can cycle. Someone may have a disability that makes it impossible to teach cycling to the children, and some parents may perhaps not understand the importance of early learning.

Knowledge of traffic rules and hazards in traffic is something one carries with them throughout life, and we mean that if society steps in and helps here, it would be a cheap traffic safety-promoting measure. Perhaps it would be appropriate to reintroduce the old traffic play schools, where children in a lighthearted and playful way were taught traffic rules and road signs.

I otherwise welcome that it is our former Minister for Infrastructure who is currently sitting as the presiding officer in the chamber - lovely!

Mr. Speaker! Who could have believed ten years ago that electric scooters would gain such a foothold as they have? As recently as seven or eight years ago, they were a rather unknown phenomenon, especially for people outside the larger cities. But this means of transport has gained incredible traction in our larger cities. I believe that it will soon be possible to rent an electric scooter in all the country's cities with more than 50,000 inhabitants.

Electric bicycles are very popular among many, but they also cause resentment for others. They are agile, but they are not completely harmless. At the same time as they provide you with fast transport, they reduce exercise, and they can hinder accessibility for those who are visually impaired. Regardless of what one thinks about this new phenomenon, I can state that there are problems to solve and that the legislation has not quite kept up. To ban this means of transport would, however, be a questionable solution.

One problem to solve is that the electric scooters are, at best, parked on a sidewalk or pedestrian street, but at worst, they are tossed in a cluster or in the nearest body of water. When I speak about electric scooters here, I want to be clear that I mean those that are rented, not those owned by private individuals. It is quite few—perhaps none—who leave their private scooter on a sidewalk or throw it into the water, for that matter. We do not see the same problem with misplaced rental scooters, even though it occurs, but that may be because the interest in renting them is lower.

That electric scooters parked everywhere are an eyesore in the cityscape is one thing. But when they hinder the accessibility for those who suffer from a visual impairment and also for the police, the ambulance or waste management, we must take action. Despite the fact that the problem has been around for several years now, nothing has been done that has solved it.

The municipalities must be given greater opportunities to deal with incorrectly parked rental bicycles and electric scooters, partly to reduce personal injuries, and partly in view of the parking and accessibility problems that I highlighted. The possibility to use and rent electric scooters should remain, but there must be order and clarity.

Further measures to increase safety and reduce personal injuries could, for example, be a review of the requirements for lighting, minimum wheel size, and the condition of the brakes. Transportstyrelsen has previously been involved in removing the motor power limit of 250 watts, but we believe this would be dangerous in traffic. We propose that the limit of 250 watts should remain, partly so that one does not get an excessively powerful acceleration, and partly to avoid the same development for privately owned electric scooters as for A-tractors, where we see that manipulation of speed regulators occurs. If one, for example, had a power of 1 kilowatt on such a vehicle, one could certainly reach 60-70 kilometers per hour, which would be devastating.

Mr. Speaker! The House decided in 2021 on a notification to the Government that it should return with proposals that make it possible to construct detached cycle paths without requirements for direct connection to roads intended for motor traffic, which will likely involve an amendment of the Road Act. The Road Act currently requires that there must be a functional connection between cycle paths and public roads.

By making the Road Act less rigid, cycle paths could be made both denser and more pleasant because they would not have to be in direct connection with public roads. This decision was made in 2021, but I have not yet seen any concrete proposal for action from either the previous or the current government. It is my hope that we will soon receive such a proposal to take a position on.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, the bicycle is a part of people's transport. In many cases, people take their bicycles to the train, the metro, or the bus. Unfortunately, a large proportion of these cyclists find that someone else chooses to take the bicycle from there, and of course, I am not talking about a planned rental but simply about bicycle theft. This crime has probably affected most people, including myself. Tens of thousands of Swedes are subjected to this crime every year; according to Brå, a full 10.3 percent of the country's households reported a bicycle theft during 2021. In 2022, 62,700 bicycle thefts were reported. There is certainly a dark figure here.

Even though many more serious crimes are committed, it is very frustrating to have your bicycle stolen, and it is a distressing feeling to be a victim of a crime. It also affects the desire to cycle. It costs money and requires a police report and, furthermore, paperwork.

My bicycle usually stays in the basement - I either walk or drive, because it is cumbersome to get the bike out. I would never think of leaving it at the station and having it stolen again when I travel to Stockholm by train. I would rather walk, even though I would actually prefer to have cycled. I am certainly not the only one who opts out of this mode of transport due to the fear of having the bike stolen. According to Svensk Försäkring, more than a quarter of a billion is paid out annually in compensation for stolen bicycles in Sweden. That is a fairly high amount. Bicycles are becoming increasingly better but also increasingly more expensive, especially electric bicycles.

It is obviously not possible to station guards or police at bicycle racks. However, we mean that the law on camera surveillance should be more permissive so that places located at stations, colleges, hospitals etc., where many park their bicycles, could be monitored with the help of cameras. Furthermore, the customs' capabilities and resources should be strengthened to reduce the export of stolen bicycles - and obviously also other stolen goods - from the country.

Mr. Speaker! It should not only be safe to cycle. It should also be safe to own a bicycle and to park your bicycle, and one should know that one still has their bicycle when one is going to use it.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I am thinking of two things when it comes to the bicycle paths.

I understand the point that it is problematic that people do not know the difference between cycle lanes and cycle crossings and that people therefore do not know who has the duty to yield where. This is a problem. It is somewhat unfortunate that this design was made. The problem is well that no one understands what is what when it comes to the signs.

To go from this to that the car should always have priority and the bicycles should yield, I think is a strange way to approach it. One should, in that case, go the other way and ensure that the bicycles have priority at this type of passage, which resembles pedestrian crossings, just as they have when it comes to the zebra law. This would improve the accessibility for the cyclists.

In Stockholm, we came up with another variant. We simply placed yield signs at bicycle crossings. Regardless of what it concerns, one has a duty to yield for the vehicles or the persons passing where a yield sign is located. The Transport Agency could perhaps look into this and change the rules.

If one wants to promote cycling, I think it is strange to say that the bicycles should always wait.

I also want to bring up the electric scooters. It is interesting that we have the Speaker of the House here – he was previously the Minister for Infrastructure and worked extensively on this issue. I think Patrik Jönsson is unfair toward what the Speaker did in his previous role. Shortly before the election, legislation was adopted which means that one is not allowed to park electric scooters if they are not placed in designated spots or in bicycle racks, which has made the whole thing much better.

All these things could, of course, have been completed much earlier, but now they are in place. I wonder what change in the legislation the member would like to have.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Patrik Jönsson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Member Daniel Helldén and I will soon be out cycling in Stockholm. It could be exciting. I welcome the Speaker to join such a cycling trip; it could certainly be a very pleasant experience.

We are discussing here bicycle passage versus bicycle crossing, and we probably have very different views on what is safest. I think it is quite obvious that the one who is unprotected should also be the one who is most cautious. The principle must still be to save as many human lives as possible, and in that regard, I do not see member Helldén's proposal as particularly good.

The absolutely most dangerous place to cross the road is a pedestrian crossing. There have actually been thoughts – and I believe even that many years ago a project was started – to remove pedestrian crossings. They should either be raised – and then one must really choose the locations so that one does not disrupt for car traffic – or be marked as light-regulated passages. This is reasonable where there are very many people walking, but not where it is primarily cars driving and where there are occasional people every other hour.

Therefore, we argue that it must be reasonable that the person who is unprotected also takes responsibility for looking out for their own life. Of course, motorists are also mindful of cyclists' lives. It is not the case that one exercises their right to drive just so that the cyclist should yield at, for example, a bicycle crossing and that one hits the person if they do not – so very few people likely reason that way. It is about the principle that the unprotected road user shall be protected, and we assess that this is the best way. I do know, however, that Member Helldén has a slightly different, somewhat religious, belief that cyclists should always go first.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! I do not know if I have any religious view on this. However, I think that the one who is strong should be kind. The cars are hard and large, and in this context, they should be the ones with the duty to yield, just as it is regarding the zebra crossing law. I think that would be the reasonable thing. Then one could get this in order - everyone would know what applies.

In the places where the speed limit is over 60 or 70, Trafikverket has removed the crossings. There, the law did not work with the speeds, because people did not have time to stop. In that case, the speeds must be turned down.

Here in Stockholm, a large number of speed bumps and elevations were built - and are still being built - so that cars will maintain the speed. If we can find other smart solutions to this, through GPS and by throttling the speeds, that would be a good solution. However, I think it is strange to, as Patrik Jönsson does, prioritize the car in relation to the unprotected road users.

I thought of another thing in your speech, Patrik Jönsson. You spoke about the Road Act, about the fact that there are announcements, and about how something should come from the government. The question of the announcements, and whether they were finalized, was indeed just raised. I perceived it as that the Sweden Democrats thought that precisely that announcement concerning the Road Act was finalized – I am almost completely certain of this. I think that even that was a bit strange.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Patrik Jönsson (SD)

Mr. Speaker! It was a general circular that was sent out. I swear I have not seen any proposal, so in that respect, something is missing. I truly look forward to receiving that.

One can make one's own priorities - Daniel Helldén makes his and we make our assessments of what is least traffic-hazardous. A bicycle, which perhaps travels at an average of 20 kilometers per hour, has a significantly easier time stopping than a car does. We do not share the opinion that Member Helldén puts forward when it comes to the protected road user - somewhere there lies a responsibility on the one who is unprotected.

If we come to a decision, I think this decision is very good. It is not reasonable that there are different rules. As I understand it, Member Helldén and I share the view that this should be standardized, but we want to standardize in different ways.

I do not believe this. I believe there is a reason why just pedestrian crossings are the most dangerous passages. We really have to rethink this. I am not entirely convinced that we, for example, have the right number of pedestrian crossings. We might reduce the number further where there is not much traffic with pedestrians.

I do not share Member Helldén's opinion on this issue. I think, in any case, it is interesting that we share the view as far as it concerns that it should be uniform.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Anders Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! A bicycle has two wheels, a handlebar, a brake and a bell. How difficult can this actually be? Quite difficult and complex, it turns out.

When the bicycle was young and transitioned from the high-wheeler to two wheels of equal size at the end of the 1800s, the new type of bicycle was called the safety bicycle, while the high-wheeler was the flashy, tough model that the truly tough guys rode on. It was simply only guys who cycled back then; it was considered too dangerous for women. The high-wheeler is rarely seen today.

Today, instead, there are mountain bikes, city bikes, road bikes, tempo bikes, gravel bikes, cyclocross, cargo bikes, single speeds, fixies, recumbent bikes, touring bikes, trials bikes, BMX, tandem bikes and, not least, e-bikes, to name a few. Yes, even within the mountain bike segment, there are subgroups in the form of cross country, trial, all mountain, enduro, downhill and the somewhat unlikely fatbike.

But we do not stop there. The development has changed not only the bicycle into a multitude of variants but also what is actually encompassed within the concept of a bicycle. According to the Road Traffic Ordinance, a bicycle is also an electric vehicle with pedals but also an electric vehicle for one person without pedals, for example, an electric scooter, Segway, and electric skateboard. The definition of a bicycle has thus been broadened.

Within this relatively broad and complex area, the policy needs to be developed. Today, we lack a clear national direction. Therefore, conflicts often arise regarding, for example, electric scooters on sidewalks, fast cycling groups on highways, or mountain bikes in the forest that must share space with riders. We often see such conflicts because we lack a clear goal and a clear ambition for the cycling area.

We in the Center Party believe that governance within the cycling area needs to stem from a target-based management based on how we want cycling to look in the future instead of today's forecast-based management. It is a very important starting point for all development of the Swedish cycling country and the regulatory frameworks that are needed for us to adopt a national goal.

Cycling has come to become an important piece of the puzzle in modern society, both for leisure purposes and for utilitarian purposes. Cycling to work or commuting by train, for example, is good for the wallet, health, the environment, and often it is also time-efficient. Cycling for distribution of goods in cities is increasing rapidly, but the infrastructure is not keeping up and is poorly adapted.

We therefore consider that a developed target management would give the authorities and other actors a better opportunity to make cycling a prioritized and effective part of social planning, also in order to meet climate goals and goals regarding accessibility and public health.

A clear goal creates reasonable conditions for cycling to be prioritized and in this way contribute to the transport policy goals being reached. In other countries, work is already being done with national cycling goals, which yields a good effect. The Swedish Transport Administration's research institute, VTI, was commissioned in 2021 to develop a proposal for a national cycling goal with the aim of getting more people to choose cycling. The proposals were presented a year ago, and I believe it is now time for the Riksdag to move from words to action. It is time to decide on a national goal for cycling.

I therefore move for approval of reservation 1.

Mr. Speaker! I will also address how essential it is with a developed infrastructure and a well-functioning regulatory framework both in the countryside and in cities.

We need to work on several fronts to facilitate accessibility for cyclists. We have great potential for cycling, not least because most people live within cycling distance from work or from public transport.

Still, the cycling share in Sweden is very low in comparison to, for example, Denmark and Holland. It has fallen since the 1990s, even though it has started to increase again in metropolitan areas and in the municipalities that are engaged in cycling issues.

I want to give you a rural perspective on cycling.

In Sweden today, every third trip is shorter than five kilometers. We should certainly be able to do better when it comes to expanding and adapting for cycling. The Road Act is a hindrance that, in practice, means that many important infrastructure investments in pedestrian and cycle paths are hindered. The Road Act is completely outdated. Cycle paths cannot be subordinate to roads for cars as they are today.

For example, the national plan or the county plans cannot finance the construction or operation of a pedestrian and cycle path that runs through a forest or along a railway where there is no public road.

We must also weigh in the landowner perspective and develop our road law.

Why not conduct an inventory of all the service roads that run parallel to roads and railways? They could be classified and used as cycle paths. Appropriately, the government should give Trafikverket this assignment.

It is important to build more local and regional cycle paths, coherent cycle networks, and so-called cycle highways. It is also important to reduce the barrier effects from intersecting tracks and roads in order to increase accessibility by bicycle.

The establishment of cycle lanes is hindered by differing ambitions in the municipalities, insufficient resources, and a shared responsibility between the municipalities and Trafikverket.

The state has also recently withdrawn funding for important cycle paths.

National policy must ensure that Trafikverket receives clear mandates to construct cycle paths along both national roads and county roads and to review how widened low-speed roads with a cycle lane can become an instrument to reduce costs. Trafikverket must really get down its costs. Therefore, Trafikverket's rules and norms for cycle infrastructure need to be reviewed immediately.

Mr. Speaker! In the cities, we struggle with how we can facilitate electric-assisted vehicles, such as electric scooters, and at the same time avoid the disorder that occurs when these are thrown across sidewalks. A new law has been introduced, but the question is whether a future ban is the right way. No, really not.

Centerpartiet is a technology-optimistic party that embraces development. We welcome new vehicles and new mobility solutions. The municipalities need to take a collective grip on their urban environment.

An important instrument for giving the municipalities greater discretion is procurement, and we believe that one must review how the municipalities can be given a greater opportunity to, through the procurement tool, regulate and set requirements on which electric scooter operators with so-called free-floating fleets should be allowed to operate in a municipality.

Furthermore, the Center Party wants the 250-watt power limit that applies to bicycles without pedals or a crank mechanism to be removed. This is something that the Transport Agency has proposed in an investigation on the need for simplified rules for electric single-person vehicles. Sweden is essentially alone in the EU in having such a limitation. But I believe that the issue is unfortunately gathering dust at the ministry instead of being resolved.

Finally: We must increase the possibility of taking bicycles on trains and buses. The Centre Party therefore considers that the government must urgently investigate how it can be made easier to take bicycles on trains within the framework of national public and long-distance rail transport. Look at Denmark! Let us look at our neighbors and be inspired.

Intermodality, different vehicles and modes of transport in combination is the future. Let us develop it.

The Government! It is time to investigate the issue, now.

(Applause)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Daniel Helldén (MP)

Mr. Speaker! The positive aspects of citizens cycling cannot be highlighted enough. There is no mode of transport that is as resource-efficient, space-efficient, and positive for the users as cycling. Nevertheless, cycling is most often treated as an exception in planning, resource allocation, and the design of regulations. There is always something else that is given priority, not least at the national level.

In our Swedish municipalities, however, a rebirth is occurring today in the cycling area. Cycle paths are being built, bicycle garages are being completed in central locations, companies are arranging suitable spaces for showering and changing, residential buildings are getting mobility spaces, company bikes are becoming more common and cycling is increasing sharply - in some places so much that the infrastructure no longer suffices. There are clear goals for cycling's share in the local transport system, and the bicycle's role is integrated at the local level in the planning.

On the international arena, cities, not least during the corona period, have allocated enormous spaces for the accessibility of bicycles and, with smart, simple solutions, transformed road networks into bicycle networks. We have seen how, at a national level in a large number of countries, exemplary actions have been taken so that cycling connects towns and changes the way people move. There is a development that is incredibly positive from a resource perspective, a public health perspective, and an environmental and climate perspective.

At the national level in Sweden, cycling is treated like a stepchild. Trafikverket has the primary responsibility for Sweden's transport but focuses on other things. The possible road network for cycling is shrinking drastically, and the additions are negligible. Transportstyrelsen, which sets the regulations at the agency level, does not want to change the rules in favor of cycling. It is constantly half-measures that create problems for the municipalities when they want to give cycling a more central role. Why?

There are no national goals when it comes to cycling. There are general objectives regarding increased cycling, but no goals. We know very well that when goals are lacking, we lose the momentum within our institutions and agencies. We need concrete, national goals for how cycling traffic should increase. Then we can get some momentum in Agency Sweden and their priorities and assessments. But we have no goals.

The Swedish Transport Research Institute and their bicycle center were commissioned in 2021 by the Green Party and Social Democratic government to develop a proposal for national goals for increased cycling. The proposal was presented last spring, 2022. The goal is that cycling throughout Sweden shall increase so that accessibility is improved, public health is strengthened, and climate and environmental impact is reduced.

An interim target has been proposed of 20 percent by 2030 and 26 percent by 2035 without the share of walking and public transport decreasing, which is central in these contexts. For shorter journeys, under 10 kilometers, it is proposed that the share should increase to 30 percent by 2030 and to 45 percent by 2035 at the national level. This is what is needed: clear, measurable targets that guide the authorities' work. Without targets, we will get nowhere. The Government simply needs to present the proposals for targets for cycling.

When it comes to the availability of cycle paths around the country outside the municipalities' direct responsibility, there is a lack of real initiatives, as well as sensible infrastructure. In the national infrastructure plan, the cycle path network often has a peripheral and downplayed role. Larger initiatives are needed here.

We can observe that if one wants to cycle outside smaller towns and cities, one mostly ends up in traffic situations that are completely unacceptable. No space is given for cyclists, and a prioritization of motor vehicles occurs constantly. If it is possible to cycle, the space is frighteningly small, and most often, guardrails are erected that cut off the last bit of space for a cyclist. If it becomes a two-plus-one road, that is what does it away, and in the wake of the two-plus-one roads, one often loses alternative routes. In practice, the possibility of cycling is built away. This leads to a negative spiral where those who want and can cycle abstain. It is completely contrary to the goals for sustainable development and a reduction of the transport sector's climate emissions.

We need a national backbone for cycling. Today, important links that connect cities, towns, and villages are missing. This must happen in cooperation between municipalities, regions, and Trafikverket. Trafikverket must be a driving force and be perceived as the one who wants cycling. Then things will happen.

We do not only need to build up a national backbone - we also need to introduce what is called service-oriented cycling infrastructure in the countryside. Service-oriented cycling infrastructure is safe and secure cycle paths in connection to places with schools, shops, and other community services. It is about building separate cycle lanes in connection to local services, or - pending new infrastructure - about creating zones where a respect distance is introduced between motor vehicles and bicycles. This means that if a car comes, it must have 1 ½ meters to the bicycle when it passes.

The idea is that within a radius of 1 mile from a community or a community service, a functioning cycling infrastructure is created that enables safe and secure everyday cycling. In this way, the countryside would be strengthened and the local community made more flexible and resilient, while cycling would be promoted locally throughout the country. The need exists primarily within the road network that is currently classified as national roads or primary county roads. In the more fine-meshed road network where traffic volumes are small, one can possibly review the speeds if necessary, otherwise the need is not so great there. But the basic principle should be separated cycle paths.

In order for us to be able to achieve a purposeful cycling infrastructure, we need to change the Road Act. The Road Act implies that cycle paths in the countryside and outside built-up areas must, in principle, almost always be laid adjacent to the public road for motor traffic. Through the Road Act's definition of road and the requirements for a functional connection between road and cycle path, the possibility of establishing smart, short, and logical cycling routes is hindered.

In order to create the possibility to build functional cycle paths, the concept of "public transport" in the Road Act needs to be changed so that cycle paths are included and the concept of "functional connection" is redefined. Trafikverket has stated in a report that their collective assessment is that the accessibility in the cycle projects is often perceived to be hindered by difficulties in obtaining access to land.

Trafikverket simultaneously argues that the problems in many cases could be solved by the municipalities producing detailed development plans. But it is a strange way to do it, for to expect municipalities in all these contexts to produce detailed development plans and use those processes to ensure land access for cycling is, in my opinion, completely unreasonable. These are very long, protracted, and complicated processes that put a spoke in the wheel of the work to create good cycling infrastructure. Reasonably, cycle paths should be given the same status as roads for cars in planning contexts.

I note that the problems with the legislation have been investigated a number of times, and there is still nothing indicating that changes are underway, while projects that are in demand are lying idle, that is, are not being built. This hinders the possibilities of ensuring functional, safe, and secure cycling infrastructure throughout the country. Therefore, the government should promptly return with updated legislation in this area that ensures land access for cycle paths equivalent to that which applies to roads intended for motor vehicles.

Mr. Speaker! Cycling is not only good for public health, the environment, the climate, and accessibility – it is also good for the wallet. In a time of economic turbulence, more expensive food, more expensive housing, and lower real wages, and when people find it harder to make ends meet, the bicycle is an efficient and resource-saving means of transport that is free in its propulsion. We must not forget that in these times. Cycling fits perfectly now and is a mode of transport that can help when we need to move around.

Mr. Speaker! I move finally for approval of reservation 2 on goals for cycling, reservation 6 on infrastructure for cycling and reservation 9 which deals with the issue of traffic rules for cycling.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 4 May.)

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)