Response to interpellation 2024/25:248 on rail traffic in northern Sweden
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 funding and accessibility of rail traffic in northern Sweden. KD argues that the government's starting point is good accessibility throughout the country 1 and that it is pleasing that Trafikverket can sign traffic agreements for 2025 within the existing frameworks 2 3 4. KD emphasizes that the budget for 2025 implies an increase of 50 million kronor compared to 2024 1 2 3. MP considers that the government has caused a failure by not providing the 195 million needed to maintain accessibility 5. MP argues that it is a deterioration that the routes Luleå-Kiruna and Luleå-Haparanda are not funded 5 6. MP finds it strange that billions are spent on infrastructure but not on the trains actually being operated 7 6.
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)
Mr. Speaker! Linus Lakso has asked me if I intend to provide the funds that Trafikverket has demanded to finance the transport agreements, if I consider that the government has given the relevant transport authorities sufficient time to handle the situation the government has caused on their own, and if I can provide a clear picture of how the government views regional rail traffic with state transport agreements for interregional public transport in the long term.
As Linus Lakso knows, I am here in the chamber today, November 8, to debate the issue of transport agreements with Lars Isacsson and Åsa Karlsson. I also want to begin this time by emphasizing that the government's starting point for infrastructure policy is that all of Sweden shall function and that it is therefore important to have good accessibility between the country's different parts. Since then, Trafikverket has announced that the transport agreements the authority has signed for 2024 will also be signed for 2025. This is pleasing and improves the conditions for maintained accessibility throughout the country.
Requests have been made for the state to increase co-financing in certain cases, but as Linus Lakso knows, the funds allocated for transport agreements are limited. Trafikverket must take this into account when agreements are signed.
I also want to remind that the government, in the budget bill for 2025, proposes that just over 1 billion kronor should be allocated to finance the state's transport agreements 2025. This is approximately 50 million kronor more than the appropriation levels for 2024.
Linus Lakso (MP)
Mr. Speaker! Thanks to Andreas Carlson for being here and taking the debate! I am, however, not at all satisfied with the answer. I actually think it is a complete failure by the Minister for Infrastructure. The Government has, in fact, tasked the Swedish Transport Administration to analyze which agreements with the state were needed for these types of traffic to maintain good accessibility.
Trafikverket has analyzed the proposed level according to the instructions that the government has given to the agency. They have concluded that an additional 195 million is needed in the budget for traffic agreements to finance the accessibility that the government considers reasonable. I share that analysis. But it is completely unreasonable of the government and the Minister for Infrastructure not to provide the funds that are needed.
Trafikverket has extended some of these agreements after being put under heavy pressure from not least Miljöpartiet and a united opposition. The extensions have been made without additional funds being injected. It is therefore unfunded. It is responsible of the agency to make up for the government's failure, but unfortunately, it does not reach all the way. 48 million is still missing, and it is Norrtåg that is affected.
Trafikverket has now announced which sections they do not intend to finance. It is Luleå-Kiruna and Luleå-Haparanda. Does Andreas Carlson know how long it takes to drive between Luleå and Kiruna? That people take the car when there are no trains is, in fact, the consequence of Andreas Carlson's policy and that the government gets to decide. They are withdrawing the funding for incredibly important rail traffic in northern Sweden where there is no alternative regional transport.
I mean that this is the exact opposite of Andreas Carlsson's ambitions and beautiful words and radically worsens accessibility in the country's northern parts. My question is whether it is really reasonable. Does this improve the conditions for accessibility in the whole country? In reality, it becomes exactly the opposite.
The reasonable thing would be if the Minister for Infrastructure today gave notice that in the autumn budget, the money needed is allocated if required to maintain good accessibility throughout the country. I do not know how it is that the money is missing. Perhaps it was a mistake. Mistakes can be made, but then one needs to take responsibility for them and correct them. A reasonable notice today would be that the money is allocated so that good accessibility can be maintained even in Norrbotten and northern Sweden. My question is therefore whether Andreas Carlson can give such a notice today. I believe that very many who are dependent on trains in northern Sweden wonder what will happen with the regional rail traffic going forward.
I also do not think I have received an answer on what the Minister for Infrastructure considers regarding the long-term perspective of these agreements. I would also like Andreas Carlson to elaborate on that in his response.
Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Linus Lakso, for the questions and the commitment! I appreciate that.
The Swedish Transport Administration's announcement is, as said, pleasing. They have indicated that the traffic agreements that the authority has signed for 2024 will also be signed for 2025. This has been done within the framework that has been proposed in the budget that the Riksdag has not even decided on in all parts yet.
Mr. Speaker! It is probably too early to already ask for a decision in the supplementary budget regarding whether we will have respect for the Riksdag's budget process. But I can state that the substantial billion kronor allocated in the budget to finance the state's transport agreements represents an increase of 50 million kronor compared to the appropriation levels for 2024. Trafikverket, which has been tasked with responsibility for the state's transport agreements, has also seen that they have opportunities to extend or sign agreements even for 2025. It was a decision that I know many received with joy and some relief in parts of the country.
When it comes to assessments of distances and agreements, I must refer to Trafikverket, which has the government's mandate to carry out that work, enter into those agreements, and make assessments. As a basis for the procurements, the authority maps out the accessibility between different parts of the country, and based on those investigations, Trafikverket carries out procurements and enters into cooperation agreements. Here I want to repeat that more money is allocated for this mandate in the budget for 2025 than for 2024. It concerns just over 1 billion, and Trafikverket has already signed a number of agreements. It has been a reassuring message.
I understand and hear that there is a demand for even better long-term perspective in this. I believe that is something people always want, and it is certainly commendable, but now we have received notification from Trafikverket. I know that many consider that to be positive.
Linus Lakso (MP)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Andreas Carlson, for the answer, even though I fear that many will think it is insufficient and deeply unsatisfactory.
According to my memory, we hammered through the expenditure area for communications on Wednesday, but if the government is still open to changing it, perhaps it can be arranged. It is highly urgent.
It is quite unreasonable that one cannot cough up 48 million kronor when an infrastructure budget of 1,171 billion has been presented. 48 million may sound like a lot in the ears of the general public, but it is a fraction of a per mille of what is spent on all infrastructure.
It becomes a bit strange that billions of kronor are spent on the Malmbanan but that one is not supposed to have the means to run passenger trains on the line. To spend a very large amount of money on the infrastructure but not ensure that it is actually operated so that people can travel by train on the rails is, for me, an incredibly strange prioritization.
Again: Trafikverket has proceeded based on the government's own mandate to maintain accessibility and has also proceeded based on entirely reasonable cost increases due to inflation. The government was informed of this well in advance, already this spring.
If one had bothered to ask Trafikverket about the consequences of not allocating sufficient funds, one would have known them. I do not know if Andreas Carlson did that when it was decided not to allocate the funds that Trafikverket demanded. Now the consequence, if the government gets to decide, is that the entire sections Luleå-Kiruna and Luleå-Haparanda are withdrawn. We naturally hope that there are more responsible parties here than the government so that it does not have to happen, but I actually find the short-sightedness in the government's policy to be astonishing.
It is not unreasonable, Mr. Speaker, that Andreas Carlson corrects his mistake. It is not uncommon to allocate some extra funds in a healthcare amendment budget. It concerns very small amounts of money in a state budget, but it would make a very big difference for the people in Norrbotten and actually all of Norrland, where Norrtåg operates, if there were good accessibility and the trains ran.
I mean that this is a fundamental responsibility for an infrastructure minister, so I actually think it is weak and a bit of a disappointment that Andreas Carlson cannot take responsibility here and be a bit clearer towards those who expect the trains to run.
Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I will not correct the member, but wasn't it yesterday that the Riksdag decided on communications? Or no, it was the infrastructure bill yesterday and expenditure area 22 on Wednesday. I will correct myself instead. But the budget is a whole, and the budget process in the Riksdag is ongoing. This was what I meant in my previous post.
Just as Linus Lakso says, there are more parties here than the government. Regional public transport is a regional responsibility, and interregional public transport should primarily be operated on commercial terms. The state can act to achieve more traffic than the market provides if deficiencies in availability otherwise arise. That is why we have the system of transport agreements.
To compare with the correct figures, I think one should take the entire amount of over one billion kronor that is allocated in the budget. It is something other than the infrastructure framework that Linus Lakso refers to and relates to. One can, of course, refer to the traffic volume in a part of the infrastructure, which is what it concerns here, but the infrastructure framework concerns the infrastructure itself. It is always possible to compare in different ways, but in the budget for next year, over 1 billion kronor is therefore allocated for this purpose, an increase of 50 million kronor.
I can state that Trafikverket has indicated that the transport agreements that the authority signed for 2024 will also be signed for 2025. This has, therefore, been possible to do within the framework for state transport agreements that exists.
As said, there are more parties than the government. I will continue to follow this issue closely. I believe it has great value that many are involved, contributing, and have such an interest. We will, of course, continue to follow this in the future as well.
The message today is, however, what I have said, namely that it is pleasing and that the conditions for maintained accessibility are improving across the entire country with the information that Trafikverket has been able to provide based on both the budget they have and the assessment and the analyses that they perform within their mandate to manage the state transport agreements.
Linus Lakso (MP)
Mr. Speaker! The problem is that this simply is not correct. Due to inflation and cost increases, the funds that are now allocated mean that availability will deteriorate. Trafikverket has just announced that they choose not to finance the sections Luleå-Kiruna and Luleå-Haparanda.
We are still spending many billions on building infrastructure, and then I think it is a reasonable question to the Minister if one is not to ensure that the trains actually also run on those rails. Even if one can refer to it being a comparison between apples and pears in the budget, I think that people in reality expect that trains run when we build railway tracks. That will not happen if Andreas Carlson and the state get to decide, because then no trains will run between Luleå and Kiruna and between Luleå and Haparanda.
I do not believe, as Andreas Carlson, that this is improving the conditions for maintained availability throughout the country, but rather I mean that it is an obvious deterioration. I have some difficulty understanding how one can interpret it in any other way, Mr. Speaker.
I note that I must remain disappointed by the answer from Andreas Carlson. I can only hope that there will be improvement moving forward, but I believe that many in northern Sweden and not least in Norrbotten will be very disappointed by the government's railway policy in this case.
Now it is likely the regions that will have to step in and cover the costs, even though the government maintains that it is a responsibility to maintain interregional rail traffic.
Furthermore, the funds for healthcare have been cut by 7 billion and the general state grants by 1 billion - a substantial cut. Again: It will be tight for the regions, and the train passengers are affected.
Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I am not saying that the member is asking an unreasonable question, and I do not think it was perceived as such either. I just want to try to explain that it is not the same budget we are talking about here. It is, of course, a reasonable question when we discuss traffic and infrastructure together. That is why we have just over 1 billion in the budget for the state traffic agreements, and there is more money in the appropriation for next year.
In this debate, we have been able to note that Trafikverket has given several positive reports. Then, of course, it is important to follow the situation that the member highlights. It is Trafikverket that has the mandate to be responsible for the traffic agreements, but this is, of course, an issue that I will continue to follow.
Just as the member pointed out, Mr. Speaker, there are several actors who can be involved and contribute to this. Since it is regional public transport that is at issue, it is fundamentally the region that has the primary responsibility, but there is also an opportunity through the agreements that Trafikverket is responsible for.
I hope that we will be able to continue to have a good dialogue on this issue. I thank you for the debate today and wish the member a continued fine and happy Lucia and, eventually, a pleasant weekend.
(LINUS LAKSO (MP): Thank you, same to you!)
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.