Response to interpellation 2024/25:647 on increased costs for public transport travel
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns increased costs for public transport and the state's responsibility. KD argues that public transport is a regional responsibility where ticket prices are set at the regional level 1. KD emphasizes that the government is investing heavily in infrastructure to upgrade the road and rail networks, zero out the maintenance debt by 2037, and increase punctuality 2 1. KD believes that a robust infrastructure, increased safety, and attractive alternatives are crucial for strengthening public transport 3. KD considers it important to prioritize the basic functions of infrastructure to reclaim a maintenance debt that negatively affects passengers 4. KD emphasizes that it is important to strengthen the robustness of the infrastructure so that passengers receive a journey of good quality 4. V argues that the price increase for public transport is greater than fuel prices and that the public commitment is insufficient 5. V believes that the government delegates responsibility to the regions, abstains from national goals, and hinders transport efficiency 6. V believes that Sweden stands out by not investing sufficiently in public transport compared to other countries in Europe 7. V argues that state subsidies for local and regional public transport are needed to secure everyone's right to mobility and increase transport efficiency 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! Malin Östh has asked me if I intend to work for measures and investments that make it cheaper and more attractive to travel sustainably with public transport, as well as whether it is my assessment that further state measures are required for more sustainable passenger transport in regions and municipalities.
Public transport contributes to making society accessible by creating opportunities for people to travel to and from work, education, leisure activities, and services. Furthermore, public transport creates benefits for society, for example by expanding labor market regions and reducing the climate and environmental impact of traffic.
Organizing local and regional public transport is a clearly identified regional responsibility. Local and regional public transport is financed to approximately half by ticket revenues and to the remaining part by public funds. The public commitment is therefore large and contributes to keeping ticket prices down for the passengers.
The state is, however, responsible for a large share of the road and rail network that public transport uses, and the government is investing heavily in infrastructure. The Riksdag decided in December 2024 on a financial framework of 1,171 billion kronor for measures in the state transport infrastructure in accordance with the government's proposal in the infrastructure bill The Road to a Reliable Transport Infrastructure – so that all of Sweden can function (prop. 2024/25:28, bet. 2024/25:TU5, rskr. 2024/25:102).
The next phase of infrastructure planning now begins as the government has tasked Trafikverket with preparing a proposal for a transport-wide national plan for the transport infrastructure for the period 2026–2037.
At the same time, the government is increasing the preliminary total framework for funds for county plans by 20 percent compared to the currently applicable frameworks. It is therefore a significant increase compared to previous planning rounds.
The national plan and the county plans also contain funds for public transport facilities, both in the state infrastructure and as contributions to regional infrastructure. The historically large investment will therefore benefit public transport.
Malin Östh (V)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer.
It is expensive times for Swedish households. More and more Swedes are finding it difficult to make the money stretch. It becomes particularly noticeable when the costs increase for things that we cannot do without. We all need to eat and have somewhere to live. In three years, food prices have increased by 27 percent, and during the same period, rent levels have increased by 11 percent. Also, the costs for transporting oneself and getting to where one needs to go have increased sharply. That too is a cost that is difficult, or impossible, to opt out of.
No one has missed that there has been a major discussion about increased fuel costs. For several parties in this chamber, including the minister's own party, it was one of the most important issues of the election campaign. The minister's party leader described the price increase on gasoline and diesel during the election campaign as something that risked wiping out our own population.
The price increase in public transport is, however, silent from the Christian Democrats and other Tidö parties, despite the fact that the price increase is larger. The price for traveling by public transport has increased by 139 percent in recent decades – it is a price increase that is twice as large as the one that has occurred for gasoline and diesel.
From the Tidö parties' strong focus on gasoline prices and car transport, one might get the impression that we all drive cars. That is not the case, however – far from it. Every fifth person over the age of 18 in Sweden has no driver's license, and 25 percent of Sweden's adult population has public transport as their only travel option. That is, every fourth Swede has public transport as their only travel option; it is no small group.
The government is responsible for the entire country's development and for the entire population, so where is the government's and the cabinet's concern for this part of the population? Is that part not also at risk of being wiped out, to use the cabinet's party leader's rhetoric? There are obviously also pensioners and families with children here who are affected by high prices. There are also people here who need to be able to afford to get to work and afford to buy bus tickets for their children so that they can get to their extracurricular activities. The only difference is that one drives a car and the other takes the bus. If the first one has the Tidö parties have plenty to say, if the second one has nothing.
The Minister states in his response that the public commitment in public transport is large and that it has contributed to keeping ticket prices down. Whether the public commitment is large or not can be discussed. We believe that it is far from large enough. In fact, Sweden stands out as one of the few countries in Europe that does not invest in public transport – I will return to that. As for having succeeded in keeping ticket prices down, a 139 percent price increase is not synonymous with keeping prices down for me.
My questions remain. What does the Minister see the government can do to manage the price shock and contribute to pushing down the public transport fare?
Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! It is impossible to escape the fact that local and regional public transport is a regional responsibility. The price of tickets in local and regional public transport is set following political decisions at the regional level. Here, there is a difference compared to being dependent on a car to get to and from, for example, work.
We could probably have had a different debate if the maintenance debt in the Swedish road and railway network had not been so large. The answer to the question is therefore once again that we focus on refurbishing Swedish infrastructure. A robust infrastructure that can be relied upon is crucial for commuting. We are investing in road maintenance at a level that can reset the entire maintenance debt by 2037. This means a lot for school transport, bus traffic, and commuters in large parts of the country.
Since day one, the government has allocated more money to the roads in various budgets, most recently 500 million kronor in the supplementary budget, and in the long-term infrastructure proposition, we have stated funds to zero out the entire maintenance debt by 2037. It is a positive message to those who today wonder if one can rely on the bus arriving on time.
In the same way, we have focused on the maintenance of the Swedish railway, where the maintenance debt is even greater, almost three times as large as on the roadside. This year, more track works are being carried out than ever before, 1,700 units. This is the result of increased appropriations but also higher execution capacity at Trafikverket as a result of the assignments that the government has given the agency.
We are therefore taking responsibility for pushing back the maintenance debt, which has been allowed to increase for far too long regardless of the political color of the government.
Punctuality is improving. We see some positive signals this year. Even though we should not overstate the results of individual months, I note that according to Trafikverket, March this year was the best month in two years regarding punctuality in railway traffic. More than nine out of ten passenger trains arrived on time, which is the best result since April 2023.
We are not satisfied with that, but we see that it is progressively becoming better while the government's policy ensures that more worn-out tracks, switches, and power lines can be replaced.
We are also significantly increasing the allocation for the county plans. The increase we have in the infrastructure bill corresponds to approximately 20 percent. In the previous infrastructure bill, the allocation for the county plans was only increased by 8 percent, so it is therefore a considerably higher allocation now than in previous planning rounds. This enables the county plan developers to invest more in municipal and regional public transport measures, for example, park-and-ride facilities, improved bus stops, and public transport facilities.
We of course follow the developments within public transport in general, but let me again emphasize that the responsibility lies with local and regional operators and that the decisions are made at the regional level. I and the government take responsibility for upgrading Swedish infrastructure, which is a fundamental prerequisite for being able to rely on public transport. But questions regarding the budget for public transport must be directed to them at the regional level who bear the responsibility for it and make the decisions.
Malin Östh (V)
Madam Speaker! Let me first address this regarding the county plans, which the Minister spoke about for some time. Even if more funds are allocated, the county plans' share of the total development framework has decreased over time, and we certainly both know that the regions' assessment is that the appropriations for the county plans are insufficient. It is merely a comment on what the Minister said.
That the Minister, in their response, shifts the question to the regions is nothing new. The Minister has done so previously on a number of occasions, so that is usually the answer. Last autumn, there were four transport agreements that risked being left entirely without state funding. I then posed a question to the Minister regarding the government's responsibility for sustainable mobility and everyone's right to accessibility. The Minister responded then: "To what extent the traffic will be able to be operated in the event that the state's co-financing is reduced or omitted is a matter for the regional public transport authorities to take a position on." This is a prime example of shifting both costs and responsibilities from the state to the regions.
Precis this problem description is what Klimatkommunerna, which gathers municipalities and regions in the transition work, describes. They clearly point out that the responsibility for the transition rests heavily on the shoulders of municipalities and regions while the state pulls back. This has been said on a number of occasions.
Many municipalities and regions are taking the climate goals that the Riksdag has decided on seriously and are working actively and ambitiously to transition the transport sector and increase public transport's market share.
SKR has collectively stood behind the four-out-of-ten goal, meaning that four out of ten trips should be made by public transport. But the country's municipalities and regions are working against the wind. The Government says no to adopting the four-out-of-ten goal at the national level and abolishes the tool that has existed through the urban environment agreements so that municipalities and regions in cooperation, together, should work for a sustainable urban development and increased transport efficiency. The Government has also not taken any initiatives to handle the injustice that exists regarding state subsidies and fringe benefit taxation, where different types of transport are handled very differently. At the same time, they have also stopped a transport-neutral, fair travel deduction.
Retiring from responsibility and worsening the conditions for public transport in the way the government does has consequences. In the latest public transport barometer, we see how public transport's market share decreased during 2024.
That a sustainable mode of transport, which is almost entirely fossil-free, loses market share runs counter to both climate goals and transport policy goals, but it also runs counter to what the government itself says it wants to do. In its infrastructure bill, the government emphasizes that it wants to stress the importance of increased transport efficiency. But the Climate Policy Council stated in its latest report that the government's policy during 2024 contributed to counteracting the development towards a transport-efficient society.
So I ask again, but now from a different perspective: How can the government strengthen public transport in order to thereby increase transport efficiency, which they say they prioritize?
Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! There are several answers to the question. I will not address all parts of Malin Östh's contribution, Madam Speaker, but I will answer the question of what the government can do to strengthen Swedish public transport.
Regarding the main part, I have already answered. I believe it is important to see what can be done in the short term and also in the long term to catch up on overdue maintenance and increase punctuality in public transport so that one can rely on commuter trains and buses arriving on time so that one is not delayed to work when choosing public transport. I believe that is a very important factor when one faces the choice of means of transport to and from work. Equipping Swedish infrastructure is therefore a completely decisive part for one to be able to rely on Swedish public transport.
Another important part is to strengthen safety in society as a whole, not least in public transport and at times such as evenings and perhaps weekends. We know from various surveys that some refrain from using public transport then, for reasons of insecurity. We also have ongoing work to strengthen security in public transport. There are therefore several different parts that are significant for one to be able to travel by public transport safely and for it to be an attractive means of transport.
We do not pit different modes of transport against each other. However, we see many points in having attractive alternatives to choose from. There, the price of tickets can be a part of it, but it is at the local and regional level that the political decisions are made. We know that even today, approximately 50 percent of the ticket is paid for with public funds.
The other parts, concerning the maintenance of railways and roads, fall within my area of responsibility, and there we see a total reorganization of the policy. We now have, for the first time, a plan to zero out the maintenance debt on the road side and recover as much as possible on the railway side. We already see positive trends, even though the new national plan has not yet come into effect.
Madam Speaker! These will be important parts for regaining trust in Swedish public transport and for people to be able to know that they can get around in a safe and secure way.
Malin Östh (V)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the debate!
I note that the Minister does not provide any answers regarding all the problems that I have raised and wished to have the Minister's view on, but instead, he speaks about other matters related to the transport infrastructure.
When listening to the Minister, it almost seems as if there are no alternatives and that it cannot be done in any other way – public transport is the regions' responsibility, period, roughly. The Minister may correct me if that is a flawed interpretation, but that is how I interpret what I hear.
The truth is that Sweden stands out as one of the few countries in Europe that is not investing in public transport. If you look around Europe, you see that in large parts there is a completely different trend. There, public transport travel is increasing, and it is doing so through political priorities and decisions.
Almost one-third of the countries in the EU and also the United Kingdom have introduced some form of state subsidies to local and regional public transport in recent years. In those countries, state, municipality and region have joined forces and agreed on the shared responsibility for a strengthened, affordable public transport. It is precisely this that Klimatkommunerna is demanding in Sweden, and that it is not being done here is described by them as a problem.
Luxembourg and Malta have completely free public transport. Then we have Germany, Austria, Spain, Portugal and France, which have all introduced comprehensive national solutions to varying degrees. One can talk about Germany for as long as one likes – it is a very positive example.
In summary, there is much to be done to secure everyone's right to mobility, increase transport efficiency, and transition to a sustainable transport system. Public transport is completely central in this.
I hope that the Minister and the government take note of what is happening in Europe and follow suit. Sweden's many public transport passengers truly deserve the government's attention.
Statsrådet Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! As I said initially, I believe we would have had a different debate if we did not have a maintenance debt on the railway side and the road side that affects public transport passengers and others, including private car drivers. It affects everyone very negatively. To recover this debt, I believe, is important for those who depend on public transport in their daily lives and who do not know if they can rely on the train arriving on time, something that creates anxiety. Now we see positive trends: Nine out of ten trains arrive on time.
I have answered the questions, Madam Speaker. To the question "Does the Minister intend to advocate for measures and investments that make it cheaper and more attractive to travel sustainably by public transport?" I answered that the price of tickets in local and regional public transport is set following political decisions at the regional level.
When it comes to traveling more sustainably with public transport, it is the very basis of now prioritizing the fundamental aspects of the Swedish infrastructure's function. One should be able to travel in a sustainable and reliable way by bus, railway, or other mode of transport.
The second question was: "Is it the Council of State's assessment that further government measures are required for more sustainable personal transport in regions and municipalities?" I repeat once again that, when we have such great needs in Swedish infrastructure, it is important to make the priorities that are needed to catch up on deferred maintenance.
It is of course important that those who pay to travel by public transport receive a journey of good quality. Therefore, it is important to strengthen the robustness, which is actually lacking in Swedish infrastructure.
There are many other parts to take up in the debate, Madam Speaker, but as I see it, I have answered the member's questions to the best of my ability. I thank you very much 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.