Response to interpellation 2023/24:143 on the planning of a new railway between Gothenburg and Borås
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns the planning of a new railway between Göteborg and Borås. S argues that the railway is important for national and international utility, preparedness, green transition, and that a new main line via Jönköping would strengthen the connection between Göteborg and Stockholm 1. S criticizes the government for actively opposing new main lines 2 and asks why it is considered difficult to facilitate expansion towards Jönköping 2. C believes that the government scrapped plans for new main lines, creates uncertainty, and that schedules are being missed 3 4. C argues that Sweden must reinvest in infrastructure to avoid falling behind other countries 5. KD argues that Trafikverket can create capacity without high-speed standards 6 7 and that it is not socio-economically justified to build high-speed main lines 8. KD emphasizes that the needs of the total defense must be considered 8 and that the government should not micro-manage the agency 6 7.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! [Name] has asked me if I intend to work for Trafikverket to proceed with the proposed main alternative regarding the Göteborg-Borås section or if consideration should be given to the broad political regional and municipal compromise that has been negotiated. Furthermore, Anders Ådahl has asked me if I can provide an indication of when traffic can commence and if I will work for the line to be built with consideration for further railway towards Jönköping at a later stage. Additionally, Anders Ådahl has asked me how I intend to ensure that there is a good balance between passenger commuting and freight traffic.
Trafikverket has, in its investigation assignment for a modified solution of the railway section Göteborg-Borås, presented various alternatives for improvements in the corridor, one of which was preliminarily ranked higher by the authority after a collective assessment. None of the alternative proposals presented by Trafikverket make it impossible to extend the line towards Jönköping in the future. Trafikverket's presentation further shows that more regional benefit for invested funds can be achieved without high-speed standard. Through the measures, more capacity is created in the system, and capacity is released for freight traffic.
The Government gave a new assignment to Trafikverket in October to plan for measures in the railway system in the Göteborg-Borås corridor. The measures shall, above all, improve the conditions for commuting to work in the region as well as improve the connection to Landvetter Airport.
A starting point for the planning is that the implementation of the measures can be carried out as cost-effectively and quickly as possible. In the assignment, Trafikverket shall therefore consider feasibility from regional and local perspectives that there is a broad consensus on, provided that the object's total cost to the state does not exceed the original object's total cost in the national transport-class-wide plan for the transport infrastructure for the period 2022-2033.
It does not fall upon the government or an individual minister to micro-manage the agency's work.
Anders Ådahl (C)
Madam Speaker! I was struck by the last thing that Infrastructure Minister Andreas Carlson said, namely that it is not up to the government or an individual minister to micro-manage the agency's work. I agree with that. Let us therefore instead speak about the minister's responsibility specifically linked to the Borås-Gothenburg railway, which is of local as well as regional, national and global interest – locally for the work commute, regionally for growth and the connection to Landvetter Airport, nationally for green transition, attractiveness and labor market expansions, and globally for Swedish exports via the Port of Gothenburg.
Sweden is an old country and an old economy. We have historically made enormous investments for our well-being. We built electricity production during the 50s, 60s, 70s, and 80s. We have built schools and universities and expanded 3G, 4G, 5G, fiber, railways, and roads.
If one is an old economy, one must both maintain existing infrastructure and renew oneself through new investment. It is not possible to choose one of these if we in Sweden are to manage in the global competition. Now we live with a government that both administers a shrinking economy and ensures that we increase greenhouse gas emissions. Investments are missing, and we are unfortunately retreating into the future.
In the area of infrastructure, unfortunately, not much is happening. Decisions are pushed into the future, and other countries pass us by while we stand still. How are we to develop if we do not invest?
Most recently today in DN Debatt, some of the business elite speak out under the heading "While Kastrup takes off, Arlanda remains on the ground". Wallenberg and company write: "Infrastructure Minister Andreas Carlson promised to give an update on Arlanda's future during the autumn. Now the leaves have fallen from the trees and winter is here. We are waiting impatiently for an update."
But let us return to the railway. New main lines have been investigated and negotiated for over ten years. It was a project to connect Sweden and labor markets, a project for growth with new opportunities for freight and passenger transport, and a project to be in step with the rest of Europe.
Despite this, the government chose a year ago to scrap the plans for new main lines and instead proceed with maintenance and local railway projects. For the stretch between Göteborg and Borås, the announcement was to pause the plans for half a year. When the deadline for Trafikverket's six-month pause expired, no decision came from the government; instead, the pause was extended by a month. But at the end of October, a decision arrived. The announcement was that the government gives Trafikverket the green light to continue planning the Göteborg-Borås stretch, but what does that mean?
There is still great uncertainty regarding both the direction, scope, and timeline, as well as the balance between commuter traffic and freight traffic. Already this spring, we asked the Minister for Infrastructure in an interpellation what currently applies for Gothenburg and Borås. The Minister then gave, among other things, the information that the direction was to investigate a modified solution without the start of traffic being delayed.
In today's response, the minister backs down and says something about "as quickly as possible". It is unclear what that means. We would rather have clear statements. It is still the minister's responsibility to lead Sweden forward in the infrastructure area and be able to provide information on investments and timelines?
When can traffic start on the new railway between Borås and Göteborg? Does the minister stand by that the start of traffic will not be delayed due to the government's decision to scrap main lines, or will the railway between Borås and Göteborg be completed much later?
Madam Speaker! Now the leaves have fallen from the trees, and winter is here. We are waiting impatiently for a decision.
Niklas Sigvardsson (S)
Madam Speaker! Today it takes about 3 ½ hours to travel by train from Borås to Linköping. It takes almost 2 hours from Jönköping to Linköping. Imagine if there could be a way to change that? Imagine if there were a government that prioritized that? Unfortunately, we have a government that does not seem to think so much about just that.
Before the government took office, there was actually a proposal that would mean building together Gothenburg, Borås, Jönköping, Linköping, Norrköping and Stockholm. Those were the times!
There is a municipality and a region that want nothing more than to continue the work. They want to continue the development of their communities through infrastructure projects and stand ready to build thousands of homes and open up for thousands of new jobs. It is Jönköpings kommun and Region Jönköpings län. It should not be entirely new information for the minister, who happens to come from Mullsjö, which belongs to this region.
But what has the government done since it took office on a Sweden Democrat mandate? Well, it has taken every chance to actively oppose new main lines that build and develop communities. The first announcement was that there will be a complete stop. There will be no trains to Jönköping. There will be no trains that link labor market regions. There will be no trains that increase the possibility of transporting goods from east to west and from south to north.
Between Borås and Jönköping, it first almost sounded as if it would be worth pursuing to completely make future construction impossible. Then they started to hedge a bit. It was perhaps a bit too harsh to completely stop and make this impossible. Now, when one is potentially planning to continue with Göteborg-Borås, it should at least not be impossible to continue to Jönköping. But to facilitate such a future is apparently to go too far.
It is almost as if one would think that something dangerous could happen if it were facilitated for future construction between Borås and Jönköping and perhaps further to Linköping. But it is precisely the opposite. It would make it possible to travel by train between Borås and Jönköping in around half an hour and in another half hour to Linköping. It could bind these three labor market regions together in a fantastic way.
The effects that can be expected are that these smaller regions would find it easier in the future to find competence for the welfare sector and the companies, to find key competence that is currently being shouted for in all these three areas, to better handle cyclical fluctuations and to secure the supply of service and culture. That sounds really dangerous. My question to Infrastructure Minister Andreas Carlson is therefore why it is so dangerous to make it smooth for the continued expansion of a new main line between Borås and Jönköping.
Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! Let me begin with the last question. None of the proposals presented in the investigation make it impossible to extend the track towards Jönköping in the future. That is also an answer to one of the interpellant's questions.
Regarding the question of the start of traffic, Trafikverket presented four alternative solutions with different advantages and disadvantages in the investigation proposal. With Trafikverket's recommended alternative, the authority assessed that the start of traffic can occur in 2038. For two investigation alternatives, the start of construction can occur around 2042 and 2044.
In the investigation work that Trafikverket was in the process of carrying out, the West Swedish position emerged. As I mentioned earlier, the government is responsive to that. The alternatives available in that position are not fully investigated. We have no prestige in this but have respect for the fact that municipalities and regions can have inputs in this that Trafikverket can investigate together with the other alternatives.
It is important to establish that this needs to happen within the cost framework already established for the distance and that it should happen as quickly as possible. If, at the regional and municipal level, an agreement is reached on a solution, a dialogue is held with Trafikverket, and something else is finalized a year or two later, I will not oppose it. But we are not at that stage right now.
Trafikverket has been tasked with restarting the paused planning work for the railway on the Göteborg-Borås corridor. Following the government's decision, the planning work has received a new direction which also allows for, within the state's existing economic framework, providing the solution that a broad consensus can be found around in the region and among the affected municipalities.
Let me also come to the fourth question that the interpellator asked, regarding a good balance between commuter traffic and freight traffic. I appreciate that Trafikverket in its investigation has shown that it is possible to arrange significantly more train journeys - 9-12 million per year - without higher costs compared to the previously intended linked system with high-speed trains. It shows that it was entirely the right decision by the government to shift gears for the railway infrastructure, cancel the planning for the introduction of high-speed trains and instead find other solutions.
This meets the need for increased opportunities for regional utility and commuting. It also facilitates and relieves freight traffic, not least on the current Coast-to-Coast line, for which there are also proposals to strengthen.
The Government has tasked Trafikverket with resuming the planning work, and therefore it is not appropriate for the Government or an individual minister to micro-manage the agency's work in individual projects.
Anders Ådahl (C)
Madam Speaker! We understand that the Minister is now giving a different statement that the traffic start may be delayed. What the Minister said half a year ago therefore no longer applies, because there is other information to take into account.
When the government scrapped the plans for new main lines in Sweden a year ago, it was unfortunate from several perspectives. One of these we are witnessing now in this debate, and that is that the government is opening Pandora's box and timelines are bursting. When things that had been fully negotiated are suddenly scrapped, it opens up for uncertainties, new thoughts, and new inputs. We have now seen how the municipalities in the corridor and the Västra Götalandsregionen have fully naturally come up with new inputs on how the railway should be routed. We have seen the Sverigedemokraterna come to life and advocate for not building a new railway but instead keeping the museum railway.
The government does not stand its ground but passes the question forward without clear instructions to Trafikverket. The latest news regarding the timing for the start of traffic, according to what is buzzing in the air in Västra Götaland, is a delay of six to eight years. There must be new negotiations and, not least, new investigations for new sections.
If I have understood correctly, the budget framework that the government has set means that the costly extra investments for station premises and other things must be taken from the municipalities and from the region. Municipalities and a region that is on its knees and which has received significantly reduced appropriations for, for example, school and adult education, shall therefore be burdened even more.
How shall decisions be made, and how shall funding be secured? Is it the Government's intention that it is now up to Trafikverket, the region, and the relevant municipalities to make decisions on the new railway and that the region and municipalities shall also finance what falls outside the framework? What is the Government's role in the continued process? When is Trafikverket to be finished with its further planning? We have not received any information on that.
In a prime ministerial inquiry this spring, I asked the Prime Minister if it might have been an unwise decision to scrap main lines, as a robust and redundant railway network is an important component of civil defense. The Prime Minister did not agree with my assessment but said: Railway is an important part of the infrastructure and thus an important part of civil defense, but it is a bit more than just high-speed trains. He also received applause for his answer.
It now turns out, however, that an important component in being a Natoland is that one has precisely a robust and redundant railway network. This is something that the Armed Forces and the Minister for Defence have clearly declared. These were news that became known to the public only a month ago.
Therefore, I want to ask the Minister for Infrastructure whether it will be prioritized that a railway between Göteborg and Borås is built, given a continuation to Ulricehamn and Jönköping. I am therefore wondering if it will be prioritized – there is a difference between this and it not being made impossible.
Has this question, with regard to our defense, become more important since the decision to scrap trunk lines a year ago? I therefore have two questions. I wonder, on the one hand, how decisions are made regarding the Borås-Göteborg section, including financing, and on the other hand, whether future extension to Jönköping is now a priority.
Niklas Sigvardsson (S)
Madam Speaker! I want to continue where the interpellator Ådahl finished and remind that the Minister, in his latest statement, spoke about regional benefit. It is actually about national and international benefit. It is not only labor market regions that would benefit from this proposal.
Large infrastructure investments were planned long before the current security policy situation arose. We now need to plan for both peacetime and the threat of war. The railway will play a very large role there.
Think of the effect it would have had if we had already stood our ground and said that we are going to strengthen the connection between Gothenburg and Stockholm not only through the Western Main Line but also with a new main line via Jönköping. Imagine if we could build so that the port of Gothenburg had even more rail meters to transport its cargo on. This would benefit not only southern Sweden but the entire Nordic region in the event of a state of alert. It would ensure both secure transports in times of unrest and secure transports now that the entire industry is transitioning in the green transition.
Think how good it would be with more alternatives in Sweden that would benefit the future development and the development that is already ongoing in Europe. It would create both security and preparedness.
Jönköping County and Jönköping Municipality are ready. They are prepared to contribute to southern Sweden and northern Europe obtaining larger labor market regions, better preparedness, better service, and a better range of culture. That would make us as a country stand better when it comes to the most necessary things, but also give us things that make us flourish and live.
I want to ask the Minister for Infrastructure: What is going to happen now regarding a main line between Borås and Jönköping?
Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! I thank the members for their commitment to the infrastructure for the railway.
It is correct that it is Trafikverket that now has the assignment to continue the planning work. With the government's decision to lift the pause that was decided upon, the work returns to Trafikverket. Trafikverket's assignment includes finding regional consensus. We know that there is a great interest. There is a West Swedish position that has highlighted various measures that are not fully investigated.
There are simultaneously alternatives on the table that are within the framework and are judged to hold up in 2038. This is an alternative that will be considered and weighed against various other alternatives in the continued planning work. This work, however, needs to be done together with the region and the municipalities.
I do not think it is a matter of it being an incorrect decision. On the contrary, the Transport Authority's investigation, as I said in my previous post, Madam Speaker, has pointed out that significantly more train journeys can be achieved - it is a matter of 9-12 million per year - without higher costs compared to the previously intended linked system with high-speed trains.
The government has been clear since taking office that it is not socio-economically justified to build high-speed trunk lines. Socio-economic profitability shall be guiding when measures in the transport infrastructure are prioritized. The core tasks shall be in focus.
There is nothing in the planning of the proposals on the table that makes a continuation from Borås impossible. Just as the interpellator Ådahl pointed out, it is however the case that defense policy, or security policy, is very important and will be more important in the next national plan than it perhaps has ever been. We have in the orientation basis underlined that the needs of the total defense must be considered, which is clearer than the orientation basis has been previously.
It is about strengthening the infrastructure as well as the robustness and redundancy in the system. It can be about having more different routes. It can also be about reinforcing the infrastructure we already have.
The Port of Gothenburg and its importance for Sweden and the Nordic region was meritably highlighted by Niklas Sigvardsson here in the debate, Madam Speaker. I can only emphasize this – it is very important. However, there have not been various measures to investigate a reinforcement of the Western Main Line, which is highlighted by the Port of Gothenburg. This is something that must be considered in the continued planning work for the new national plan.
The connection to Norway is also interesting from a Norwegian perspective. There are many different interests, all of which have a high level of importance. That is why the government has now tasked Trafikverket with producing a directional basis that shall form the foundation for the national plan. It will be reported to the government in the middle of January. After that, a very good dialogue will be conducted with, for example, the referral bodies and the regions. We are not at that stage currently, but to answer the question again, there is nothing in the investigation options currently on the table that makes continued construction impossible.
Anders Ådahl (C)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answers to the questions.
If Sweden is to continue to develop as a welfare state, it is not enough to only look at the maintenance of the infrastructure. We simply must reinvest – otherwise, other countries will blow past us.
In Gothenburg and Western Sweden, we see plans for a massive new industrialization. We often talk about how much is happening in northern Sweden, but the same applies to Western Sweden. New battery factories require new skills, and if Western Sweden is to grow, we also need to have new infrastructure in place. It is not enough to maintain.
Every day, 125,000 people commute in the Göteborg-Borås corridor. However, it is less than 1 percent who take the train, and it is not so strange when the train has an average speed of 63 kilometers per hour. The travel time then becomes very long. The effect of this is packed buses, difficult traffic congestion, capacity shortages in public transport, and long travel times regardless of the mode of transport. This unfortunately leads to reduced economic growth, a poorer business climate, increased emissions, and diminished quality of life. The socio-economic costs are very large.
In that case, the socio-economic gains could potentially become very large if one has the power to build new railways and, most preferably, new main lines. An expansion is expected to shorten the travel time to 35 minutes, and the travel capacity would increase significantly. The opportunities for exchange for people, companies, and educational institutions would be improved, and thus the conditions for sustainable development, both economically and socially.
Finally: Does the Minister think it is reasonable to wait as long as until 2046 before we get tracks to Landvetter Airport and before we can travel by train in a proper way between Borås and Gothenburg?
Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! This question should reasonably be addressed to those municipal and regional politicians who are collectively in agreement on an alternative that came in late during Trafikverket's investigation work and which is not fully investigated. There is another alternative for 2038 that stays within the framework. I believe that this discussion will be conducted at the regional level. I have no prestige in this but have only noted that there is a very strong regional demand. It now lies with Trafikverket to continue working on this because the pause has ended and the planning work has resumed.
When it comes to more infrastructure, I want to emphasize that I do not share the picture Anders Ådahl paints. Very much is happening right now. Not least, we demonstrated this with the second part of the assignment to Trafikverket, which was adopted on the same day as Göteborg-Borås. Trafikverket was then tasked to begin planning for a number of measures in the railway system in Skåne that increase capacity when the Fehmarn Bält connection opens.
It is about the four-track Lund-Hässleholm, which was the only thing one got for the money with the new main lines for high-speed trains, plus a new grade-separated track crossing at Malmö yard, the construction of more platform tracks in the station hall at Malmö central, the expansion to double track between Östervärn station and Malmö central, the Slätthult passing track on the Southern Main Line, the meeting track on the freight corridor through Skåne, and the Rättelöv passing track and track 21 in Hässleholm on the Southern Main Line. One thus gets much more than what was in the previous plan thanks to the decision the government has made.
In other words, a lot is happening in the infrastructure area. We need to upgrade the infrastructure we have, and I look forward to taking part in Trafikverket's work when they submit their report. Thank you for the debate!
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.