Response to interpellation 2022/23:52 on the capacity of Arlanda Airport

Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Isak From has asked me if I intend to take measures and work for investments to meet current and future capacity needs at Arlanda Airport, and what measures and investments that would involve in that case.

I want to begin by clearly underlining Arlanda Airport's very important role in the Swedish transport system but also as a growth engine for the Swedish economy.

Arlanda Airport is Sweden's by far largest airport with an extensive national and international route network. It connects the country with its hub function for both domestic and international traffic by offering direct flights to both national and international destinations. Arlanda Airport therefore contributes to a fundamental national and international accessibility for Sweden's population and business sector.

There are currently two investigations concerning Arlanda Airport. The first investigation, regarding the preparation of a plan for Arlanda Airport's future development with Peter Norman as the investigator, was presented on June 14 this year. The report contains many and extensive proposals and was handled through a referral process during the autumn. The investigation and the referral responses are currently being analyzed in the Government Offices. In August 2022, Peter Norman began the second assignment to analyze and propose a long-term sustainable direction for the state's responsibility for airports in Sweden. The assignment covers all airports, including Swedavia's, and is to be reported by December 15, 2022, at the latest. A standard referral process is expected thereafter.

The government has not yet taken a position on the proposals in the Arlanda Report or on the further process. I believe, however, that there is added value in taking a collective grip on the proposals from both investigations and the views of the referral bodies.

I will therefore return to these issues at a later time.

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

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you to Andreas Carlson for the answer - initially it looks very good!

I have submitted this interpellation because I completely missed Arlanda in both the palace agreement and the government statement. The new government and the coalition partner Sverigedemokraterna, however, placed great emphasis on Bromma. But just as in the previous government's, and particularly Tomas Eneroth's, work, Arlanda is the airport that is central for the Mälardalen region and for Sweden, especially for northern Sweden, when it comes to the possibility of good communications out into the world.

Peter Norman's investigation is clear and leaves several good proposals. It is clear that the responsible minister could take action on several of the proposals already.

Many of us probably thought after the pandemic that the queue chaos at Arlanda would be over. But unfortunately, I have personally tried the very long queues. Most recently yesterday, I was called and contacted by travelers who had stood in for more than an hour. This is a reality that is here and now. If Arlanda is to be competitive, we cannot have a situation where people actually miss their flights or have to stand in the security checkpoints for very long.

It is completely unreasonable that Swedavia has not been able to address and fix this part, as the chaos at Arlanda is taking on international dimensions. It damages the reputation of Arlanda, for the Stockholm region, and for all of Sweden. This should be seen in light of the fact that our neighboring countries Finland and Denmark are announcing major investments in Helsinki and Copenhagen at their central airports because they believe they can be important hubs in the Nordics for travel out into the world. In Finland, they have for a long time expanded the capacity to Asia - Japan, South Korea, China and so on. Copenhagen is investing towards the rest of the world and towards Europe.

Northern Sweden and Mälardalen need to have a flight connection so that we, with a transfer at Arlanda, can travel directly to Brussels, Milan or New York. We do not want to see a situation where Arlanda is bypassed by others because we have been slow to act.

Peter Norman's investigation is important. I believe there are reasons to already announce the appointment of an Arlanda investigation, because here it also concerns the cooperation between Trafikverket, the municipality, the region, and the surrounding area.

How are people to get to and from Arlanda? How can we reduce car traffic to Arlanda? How can we increase rail communication to Arlanda? How can we ensure that everyone who now wants to travel from northern Sweden out into the world can see Arlanda as the hub for this? These are extremely important questions, and many of these can the government address here and now.

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

Jesper Skalberg Karlsson (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you to Isak From, who raises the important issue of Arlanda Airport. But it is not really possible to talk about Arlanda without also talking about Bromma Airport. It is clear that we now have a government that wants to keep Bromma Airport as the hub for Swedish domestic flights. Bromma is an excellent airport, not least because Region Stockholm has now extended the Tvärbanan all the way so that it is more accessible.

It is gratifying that the policy of decommissioning, where one wants to shut down functioning infrastructure, has now been consigned to the scrap heap of history. It would have become permanently worse for domestic aviation without Bromma Airport. We also know that new airports do not grow on trees. What is decommissioned will not come back later.

It is good that we have two airports here in the Stockholm region. Not least during the pandemic, we really noticed what redundancy means in the transport system.

I can also say that for my own region, Gotland's part, it is good that we have two airports to choose from. One has more options if one is going further into the country or the world, and it also leads to increased competition. We know that if we have two airports and several airlines, the prices become lower than if we only had one airport and one airline.

But to return to Arlanda, which the interpellation is about, there are problems there. Long queues are mentioned. I can also say that when one flies from Gotland to Arlanda, the plane is usually parked far out on the asphalt, and then you have to take a bus in to the terminal because the slots, so to speak, are full. In addition to it being unpleasant to be deprioritized, this also leads to longer travel times.

What has been done regarding Arlanda previously? What has been done from the political side during the last eight years? It is unfortunate to state that the Arlanda Council mostly became a political backdrop. No progress was made; one could not compete with Kastrup and Gardermoen during all those years.

One might wonder if it was perhaps because of the pandemic that the work on Arlandarådets final report was delayed. Perhaps to some extent. But Arlandarådets final report was ready already in March 2019, long before the terrible virus reached Sweden. That is why it is a bit far-fetched, as Isak From does in his interpellation, to demand that everything that was not achieved in eight years should now be accomplished in eight weeks.

Much is needed to strengthen the role of Arlanda Airport as a hub in the Nordics, which Peter Norman's investigations have shown - Peter Norman, who is also a part-time Gotlänning. Proposals are mentioned for one more landing strip, an additional exit from the E4, and a better solution for the trains. This may sound like a very brief enumeration, but it concerns very large investments.

Therefore, I think it is good that the government wants to look at this collectively and also test it against public finances. One cannot look at individual airports and add or subtract things; instead, one needs to see domestic aviation and the role as a hub in the Nordic region as a whole.

I look forward to the investigation being completed and to the government returning to the issue.

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

Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, members, for the commitment to this important issue! I can assure Isak From that the absence of Arlanda in the Tidö Agreement and the government statement does not mean that Arlanda is deprioritized in any way. The reason why Bromma, on the other hand, is included is that that airport has been questioned. Bromma will, I believe, be an important airport in the coming years, for reasons that Jesper Skalberg Karlsson also cites.

But I will focus on Arlanda. I believe we need to see how important aviation is and, above all, will be even in the future in Sweden. Here, I can imagine that there have been somewhat divided opinions in the previous government's government basis, but this is what the new government agrees on.

We also see how the development, not least the technological development, and the climate transition taking place within aviation opens up new opportunities. Those who perhaps feel a bit of the flight shame—which I mean there are already quite small reasons to feel today—will have very few reasons to feel it within six to eight years. The Gothenburg-based company Heart Aerospace expects to have electric aircraft in the air in six years, and the industry itself is working towards being completely fossil-free by 2030. I believe this will change travel patterns, travel habits, and attitudes toward aviation. It will be seen as a very important mode of transport, among several others.

That is why the development of aviation is so important, and that is why we, as I said in my opening response, will handle the two investigations that are now on the table – both the one recently concluded by Peter Norman and the one by the same investigator that will soon be completed – to review this and see what challenges and proposals need to be addressed when it comes to aviation.

I shall mention a positive proposal from my representative, the Social Democrat Tomas Eneroth. In the national plan, there is a mandate for Trafikverket to investigate capacity for land transport to and from Arlanda. This will be important for accessibility. There are also other parts that we will tackle with high speed.

There have been some reflections regarding what effects the pandemic would have on air travel. If one zooms out and looks back a bit, one can state that 2018 was a record year for aviation in Sweden. Then, just over 39 million passengers traveled to or from Swedish airports; of these journeys, 31.6 million were international journeys. The number of domestic journeys amounted to just under 7.7 million. The trend for international traffic had until the pandemic been clearly increasing over several years, especially at Arlanda.

After the pandemic, air traffic has now picked up again. In the autumn of 2021, traffic began to recover from very low levels, and during 2022, air traffic increased rapidly. According to statistics from Swedavia, the number of passengers at Swedavia's ten airports at the beginning of November amounted to 77 percent of 2019 levels.

We will work with the proposals that already exist in the first Arlanda investigation. But we will, as said, return with these parts jointly, when Peter Norman has come forward with proposals in the ongoing Airport investigation. This is, I mean, a responsible way to handle the issue. It does not mean that we are putting this on the back burner, on the contrary. We have hit the ground running with aviation policy during the first eight weeks of government and will return to the Riksdag. I also look forward to continued dialogue with Isak From in that regard.

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

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Andreas Carlson and Jesper Skalberg, for the contributions! I must nevertheless say that I agree with part of what Jesper Skalberg puts forward. But Bromma as the hub of the country is perhaps not quite correct. It is still the case that even people from Gotland want to travel out into the world. And at Arlanda, we have many airlines and thus also reasonable competition.

However, Arlanda may not have the conditions fully at the present time. One was on the way towards a peak before the pandemic. Right now, we see that we are far from having stepped up. We have the completely horrible security queues. We also have a situation where one cannot manage the winter maintenance. The latest snowstorm caused long circuits again. Several airplanes had to circle over Arlanda before they could land. I was myself in an airplane that finally could land and then had to sit in the airplane for an hour waiting for the bus, because it could not get out to the airplane because the winter road maintenance at Arlanda was completely non-existent.

Of course, there are issues to address here and now. That was also why the former Minister for Infrastructure, Tomas Eneroth, just as Andreas Carlson reported, both commissioned investigations and presented the assignment of a plan. This can be worked on directly.

An Arlanda negotiation is needed. It is needed for the development in the Stockholm region. It is also needed so that everyone in the country around the Mälardalen region can get to Arlanda and out into the world.

Another important issue that we have discussed is that the government's perhaps somewhat questionable attitude towards biofuels also harms the aviation transition. Peter Norman's Arland report shows that we need to ensure an interim goal for large-scale Swedish production of fossil-free aviation fuel. We need to appoint an aviation fuel commission to ensure that this can be achieved. Say what you want about electric aviation; it may be something we can manage for shorter distances some time in the future, but in the foreseeable future, it will be about traditional aviation fuels that emit carbon dioxide. Then we need to have more fossil-free fuels.

This is an important part for Sweden to meet the climate goals. Here, Arlanda has another important role. If Arlanda is to be given the conditions to increase the proportion of fossil-free in the fuel tanks of the airplanes, one needs to have the assignments. One needs to have measures and decisions from Sweden's government. Here, Andreas Carlson has an important task to take hold of.

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

Jesper Skalberg Karlsson (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for your contribution, Isak From!

I think it becomes clear in this debate that the previous government really prioritized what they spent their time on. When the Arlandarådet final report arrived in March 2019, they put it in the filing cabinet and did nothing more to develop Arlanda airport. What they did instead was produce investigations on how Bromma airport could be rapidly decommissioned. They thus did not let Arlanda grow to be able to take over the domestic traffic, and they wanted to shut down Bromma airport so that the domestic traffic could not continue to function in the same way as before.

It was a clear prioritization. I am glad that we have a new government that looks at these issues more seriously, both in terms of how we can solve the acute crises and how we can strengthen accessibility and competitiveness in the long term.

It is clear that the first eight weeks with a new government have been largely spent on resolving previous, politically created crises. We see the electricity prices, we see the fuel prices, and now on Tuesday, a gas price subsidy was also presented.

There is a lot of crisis management when there is a crisis, and therefore I am particularly pleased that Infrastructure and Housing Minister Andreas Carlson also mentions something about the visions surrounding future aviation in Sweden. After crisis management, one also needs to work on what Sweden we should have on the other side and in the long term.

Electric aviation is an excellent such question. It is really cool that Heart Aerospace is located right here in Sweden. Then I can hold a pious hope that the first commercial electric flight goes to just Bromma airport - perhaps preferably also from Visby airport, as it is a short distance that is well-suited for electric aviation.

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

Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)

Madam Speaker! I will begin by going back to the assignment to develop a plan for the development of Arlanda Airport and the investigation commissioned by Tomas Eneroth. I praised the former Minister Eneroth for that investigation and also for the assignment to Trafikverket. It was based on an announcement from the Swedish Riksdag, where there was a will from the then-opposition's side to take into account that aviation will be an important mode of transport even in the future. It was based on that announcement, which was based on a report from the Transport Committee, that the then-government produced an investigation.

I welcome it. There are very many and extensive proposals in the first investigation, which I have spoken about today. Several of them concern what Isak From also touched upon, namely the transition in aviation to become fossil-free. One of the proposals is that aviation should be fossil-free by 2045 at the latest. There are different proposals for initiatives that the investigation suggests the government should take. This is something that we, of course, will deliberate on carefully and return to.

Peter Norman also points out the potential of using Bromma Airport exclusively for fossil-free flight. I will not and will not express an opinion on which distances will be served by electric flight first. It is an operational question – in the same way that snow removal at Arlanda is an operational question which, which I believe Isak From is very well aware of, is handled by Swedavia.

In order to be able to manage the development and develop Arlanda Airport in a long-term sustainable way, assessments and measures from a holistic perspective are required, encompassing the airport, connecting land transport to and from the airport, as well as the airspace. This requires cooperation between many different actors.

The government has been clear that aviation will be an important mode of transport even in the future. I believe, not least based on the initiatives that exist in the Swedish business sector, that we will see a development in the industry that enables flexible and environmentally friendly travel. As I said in a previous post, Madam Speaker, the industry itself points out that it can be fossil-free as early as 2030. One might think that is a long way off, but it is only "just" eight years away. It is the same amount of time as the previous government had in power. During the eight weeks that I have been Minister for Infrastructure and Housing, just this has been an important part of the development, in the same way as other important modes of transport.

I also do not believe that one should set the flight against anything else. One should not shame passengers who use such an important mode of transport, not least for - which Isak From has also pointed out - the northern parts of the country. We are an elongated country with great distances where there will be a need for people to be able to move, go to work and visit loved ones.

Infrastructure policy and transport policy are actually what lay the foundation for our entire social community - that one can move and that one can rely on the train running on time, that the flight leaves on time and that one gets off the plane on time. There is much to work on here, and I truly look forward to that work. I will also return when we have handled both of these investigations collectively.

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

Isak From (S)

Madam Speaker! I still think that this interpellation has been important. There was and still is concern. When the palace agreement and the government statement so clearly mention Bromma but not Arlanda, it has roughly the same effect as when one clearly mentions nuclear power but not offshore wind power. Then there are many who become concerned: Where did this go?

What I raised regarding the chaos at the gates, the snow chaos, and the lack of capacity at Arlanda also damages the confidence in Sweden as a destination. The tourism industry is important for the Mälardalen region, for northern Sweden, and for many other parts of Sweden, and Arlanda is a hub for the long-distance guests to Sweden. With the bad reputation, we lose in the competition against Oslo and Helsinki. It is clear that such things have an impact. Then we need to take the next step.

Yes, Jesper Skalberg, there is a difference in the politics. The Social Democratic government was very clear and appointed the Arlanda investigation. Arlanda is the hub of air traffic. It needs to be prioritized and invested in. We need to have a new runway. We need to ensure that traffic to and from Arlanda airport is improved and that the work together with Trafikverket and the rest of the region can proceed. Therefore, it is central that the government signals that an Arlanda investigator is important. Andreas Carlson and the government can do that here and now. One can also invite Swedavia to actually find out: How can we solve the traffic chaos that is here and now?

Madam Speaker! I would like to conclude by wishing Andreas Carlson and the Speaker a Merry Christmas, if we do not see each other in another debate. Have a nice weekend and Merry Christmas, for now!

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

Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)

Madam Speaker! It sounds as if the previous government made incredibly large investments and took initiatives. It would, of course, have looked completely different if they had not commissioned the Arlanda inquiry during the last of their eight years, but during the first of their eight years.

Again: I have in previous debates during the day pleaded for a certain self-reflection. How would it have been if an Arlanda inquiry had been appointed during year one? Then, for the time being, the Miljöpartiet was in the government. That it was not so during the last part of the years might have been something that facilitated things. It is also about the announcement where we, of course, demanded that the government would eventually act. It was my party – I was in opposition at the time – that contributed to it. It is clear that we will manage this inquiry in a wise and good way. There are several very extensive proposals in it.

The Tidö Agreement has been mentioned. It is not all-encompassing and has never claimed to be all-encompassing. Things that are not included in the Tidö Agreement are, by definition, not deprioritized. On the other hand, one needs to prioritize and clearly define what one is to work with. There has been a questionable handling of nuclear power. Existing nuclear power has been decommissioned and actively countered. In that case, it may be necessary to clearly point out a plan to repair that damage, and that lies on the government's agenda.

In the same way, it is when it comes to the uncertainty regarding Bromma, which will also be an important airport in the future. We have announced that we will not decommission Bromma airport. Rather, we shall see how it can be a part of the transition that is now taking place in the aviation sector. There are great opportunities there. This does not in any way mean that we are deprioritizing Arlanda, rather the opposite, I would like to say, Madam Speaker.

I will return. I also thank you for the Christmas greeting. I want to start by wishing a Merry Lucia, so that we take it in the right order. Christmas still feels a bit far off for me, but I also wish a Merry Christmas when it comes, of course.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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