Response to interpellation 2025/26:367 on the motorway bridge in Södertälje
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 motorway bridge in Södertälje and the need for robust transport infrastructure. KD argues that the government wants to create a system where socio-economic profitability and the needs of the total defense are taken into account 1. KD emphasizes that infrastructure measures should occur faster to build away bottlenecks 2 3 and that more infrastructure must be achieved for the money since maintenance has been neglected 3. KD believes that previous governments have not handled expert opinions correctly, which is a political failure 4, and that the government is now spending billions on maintenance and careful prioritization 4. C argues that a widening between 2033 and 2037 would create unreasonable consequences for Södertälje and Sweden 5. C demands an earlier investigation into an alternative connection to secure redundancy for the total defense 5 6 7 and hopes that a four-year period is not scheduled for the 30s, as the consequences for the business sector would be enormous 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.
Infrastruktur- och bostadsministern Andreas Carlson (KD)
Mr. Speaker! Kerstin Lundgren has asked me four questions regarding the motorway bridge in Södertälje. The first question is in what way I intend to take into account the benefits for business and total defense in a widening of the bridge. The second question is whether I intend to begin the intervention after Förbifart Stockholm is completed. The third and fourth questions are whether I and the government have clarified the total defense benefit with a complementary connection to the motorway bridge and, if so, what measures I will take.
Kerstin Lundgren and I had an interpellation debate on this issue in December last year. What has happened since then is, above all, that the referral period for the proposal for the national plan has expired, that a number of referral meetings have been held, and that the preparation in the Government Offices has proceeded.
I will briefly state the process that has been in the matter.
In the infrastructure bill from 2024, the government clarified that it wants to shape a robust and efficient transport infrastructure system where the advantages of all modes of transport can be utilized in the best way and complement each other. A well-functioning infrastructure is crucial for Swedish competitiveness and for all of Sweden to function. The economic framework for the next planning period, 2026–2037, amounts to 1,171 billion kronor. It is a historically large investment where we have increased the infrastructure framework by over 200 billion kronor compared to the previous planning period and where we prioritize caring for the existing transport system and prioritize maintenance while the transport system can be developed.
Against that background, Trafikverket has been tasked with developing a proposal for a new national plan for the period 2026–2037. In the assignment to Trafikverket, the government has, among other things, emphasized that socio-economic profitability shall be guiding, that it is important to have a corridor and system perspective, and that the deteriorated security situation and the needs of the total defense need to be considered. Objects that are not transport-politically justified but primarily aim to strengthen civil or military defense must, however, be assessed and financed in a special manner. These objects shall therefore not be included in the proposal for the national plan.
Trafikverket's planning proposal contains a number of objects linked to Södertälje, including a new object involving capacity reinforcements on the existing motorway bridge in Södertälje. The proposed object involves a widening of the bridge to enable an expansion from two to three lanes in each direction, but it also contains measures to strengthen the robustness of the motorway bridges.
All parliamentary parties reached a cross-bloc agreement in June 2025 to debt-finance 300 billion kronor for the total defense during the period 2026–2034. Of these, a maximum of 50 billion kronor may be used for investments in physical infrastructure and storage of food, medicines, and fuels as part of the civil defense.
I conclude by underlining that there are no positions from the government as of yet regarding Trafikverket's proposal or the funds for physical infrastructure linked to the civil defense framework. Both issues are under preparation, and we intend to return to this.
Kerstin Lundgren (C)
Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer, even though it mostly concerned the process and I did not receive an answer to the four questions I asked. The answer, as said, contained mostly a narrative about the process and what we have agreed upon, as well as a conclusion that the preparation is ongoing, which I am also aware of.
My questions are about highlighting how serious an incorrect decision by the minister could become. In Södertälje municipality, there are two companies of total defense importance, Scania and Astra Zeneca. Stockholm's civil fuel storage is also in Södertälje, and the municipality is a node for strategic transport projects: two European routes, the motorway bridge, and Södertälje canal.
When I now raise the question again, it is not, as last time, about an alternative connection to increase safety, namely a tunnel under Södertälje canal, but this time I submitted the interpellation because it has come to my attention that Trafikverket proposes that a widening of the bridge should take place between 2033 and 2037. Four years of disruptions on a strategic traffic route would create unreasonable consequences for Södertälje's residents and business owners and also for the whole of Sweden.
The widening would also take place after Förbifarten opens in 2029 or 2030. When Förbifart Stockholm finally opens, traffic is expected to increase by up to 35 percent by 2040–2045. This would therefore mean a four-year closure of the bridge for widening works at the same time as the traffic intensity increases sharply.
The cost of this is significant, and for that reason, I expect the Minister to be very careful to ensure that this widening, if it is to be done, is not started as far ahead as in Trafikverket's proposal and that it is also accelerated so that it does not take four years.
At the same time, it is also clear from the referral responses and the Swedish Armed Forces' signal that redundancy needs to be strengthened regarding the passage over Södertälje canal. It is a strategic issue for Sweden's total defense.
Mr. Speaker! I also expect that in the plan which will eventually be decided, there is a clear mandate to carry out an alternative investigation regarding the Bypass. It could be another bypass or alternatively a tunnel, which has been proposed for a long time and which we debated last time.
Trafikverket says that it will take 20–30 years before something such can be put in place. It would be a total mistake to do nothing. It would be to play with Sweden's total defense.
Infrastruktur- och bostadsministern Andreas Carlson (KD)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Kerstin Lundgren, for your questions and your commitment to this issue! It is not just a local issue for Södertälje, but it has implications for the total defense's readiness. It is important from a total defense perspective. I want to be clear about that first.
Since then, it is difficult for me, if not impossible, to engage in discussions about exact years in this stage of the process that I described. Kerstin Lundgren can, however, be confident in the direction that I have had in infrastructure policy during these years as Minister for Infrastructure and which I will continue to have.
It is about building away bottlenecks and not building new ones. It is important that infrastructure measures that are important are implemented as quickly as possible. Regardless of how the government lands on decisions regarding the national plan, the needs of the Armed Forces and the business community are, of course, something that underlies the decisions we will make.
Mr. Speaker! I think I will basically content myself with saying that. It is a rather clear message from my side at this stage of the process. Kerstin Lundgren is one of the Riksdag's experienced members who knows how national infrastructure planning works.
In the situation we are in now, I will not be able to answer any more of the specific questions that Kerstin Lundgren has asked than that, so far, there are no positions from the government regarding Trafikverket's proposal. There are also none regarding the funds for physical infrastructure linked to the civil defense framework that we have agreed upon.
One approach is, of course, that we will base it on the Armed Forces' needs and analysis. In Trafikverket's proposal, we already have the total defense's needs on the drawing board much more clearly than before. Therefore, these are pressing issues that the member is raising.
I can assure Kerstin Lundgren that we will study this and be very careful before we make decisions, so that no bottlenecks are created and so that infrastructure measures are put in place as quickly as possible.
Kerstin Lundgren (C)
Mr. Speaker! I note that the Minister says that one should not make decisions that involve creating new bottlenecks.
If Förbifarten is opened and the traffic intensity over the motorway bridge over the canal in Södertälje increases in the way that Trafikverket itself predicts, and one simultaneously closes that very traffic route for four years to carry out a widening, one does not create a solution to the vulnerability that the Försvarsmakten says the bridge constitutes.
We already have major traffic disruptions at the highway bridge today. This would mean that one is practically almost putting a padlock on the crossing over the canal. It will have enormous consequences.
Scania has in a forecast estimated that as a result of the traffic disruptions there will be a productivity reduction to a value of approximately 800 million kronor annually, if the reconstruction amounts to 50 percent. One can then imagine what that means for AstraZeneca, for other companies in the Stockholm region and for Sweden's economy and growth.
This is an extremely serious issue that must land correctly when decisions are made. It will have significant consequences for Swedish business, Swedish growth, Swedish jobs and, in the long run, also our total defense capability.
If one chooses the widening solution – which I think would be regrettable – it is important that it is done earlier and faster so that this effect is not caused. It must be more in phase with Förbifart Stockholm.
It is about a 35–40 percent increased traffic intensity over Mälarbron by 2045. If one knows that such a traffic increase will occur, one must ensure that it works. Trafikverket says that in 20–30 years, i.e., at some point beyond this, one can imagine starting to investigate an alternative bypass with a tunnel or another bridge.
One must ensure to press for a preliminary investigation. It does not cost billions at this stage. It would be a clear signal that one sees this and that one must have a readiness to act.
In that context, it is not least about the Armed Forces' clear signal regarding vulnerability and the need for redundancy. The Minister must ensure that a decision is not reached that causes the question of an investigation, the question of redundancy, and the question of creating an alternative bypass to end up in the drawer and that one then waits and lets someone else face the consequences.
It is about the Swedish economy, Swedish growth, Swedish business, and this region. Actually, it is about all of Sweden, both north and south of the passage.
Infrastruktur- och bostadsministern Andreas Carlson (KD)
Mr. Speaker! It sounds like Kerstin Lundgren and I are quite in agreement. Earlier and faster have been slogans, if not a mantra, for us to get out as much infrastructure as possible. It needs to happen faster.
It has not been a surprise that Förbifart Stockholm would be completed. In the national plan that we inherited when we took office and which still applies, the aspects that we are discussing today were not included.
Account has not been taken of the fact that traffic will increase north of the bypass, even though it was on the table in at least two previous national plans or in the underlying documents from Trafikverket that formed the basis for the previous government's decision. We have inherited a situation where much needs to happen faster, and in reality, it should have happened significantly earlier than it is happening with this plan.
Mr. Speaker! We will be extremely focused on getting infrastructure in place earlier and faster. It shall not create new bottlenecks, as I said earlier. When one builds new infrastructure or invests in existing infrastructure, there will be disruptions during the time.
Now I am not talking about this individual case. But it could be that in other planning, Trafikverket plans to take measures during periods of the year when there is less traffic for the business sector, let's say the summer period.
I do not know all the parts of this individual case, and I cannot comment on the years, but one can look at other examples where different measures have been taken. One takes measures, then the intensive period comes, and after that, one takes the next measure the following summer.
We may not have that time in this situation, so it will be important to get things out faster. Then it can also have a greater impact. This is the challenge of catching up on the deferred maintenance in the Swedish infrastructure while the needs are increasing.
It is clear that it would have been better to discuss this 20 years ago, and it would have been better if one had not started neglecting the maintenance of the Swedish railway and road network 30 years ago.
Now we stand in a situation where the needs of the total defense and the business sector are increasing and where travel is expected to increase. At the same time, we have a historically large framework; our budget is increasing by 200 billion in fixed prices, which is an increase of approximately 27 percent compared to the current plan.
It is a historically large investment in infrastructure, but then it is also important that it is not just about more money, but about getting more infrastructure for the money and that it happens earlier and faster. On that point, we agree, Mr. Speaker.
Kerstin Lundgren (C)
Mr. Speaker! It is clear that much would have been better if things had been done differently earlier. Södertälje Municipality has worked intensively to try to influence and draw attention to the situation. The Swedish Transport Administration, however, has not always wished to listen.
Mr. Speaker! When the Minister now says he is so aware that mistakes have been made, that the situation has not been taken into account previously and so on, I expect that he will not repeat the mistakes. It would be catastrophic for coming decades, because it would mean that at some point around 2050, we will be standing here and debating the consequences of no measures having been taken now, in 2026.
It is about getting an alternative connection, it is about redundancy, and it is about ensuring that this work has been done in time, and earlier, so that one can meet the increased traffic intensity that will arise on one of Sweden's most strategic crossings, the motorway bridge in Södertälje. It is a crossing for two motorways that connect the Stockholm region with southern Sweden, northern Sweden, and the rest of the country, and which has a need for better throughput.
I really hope that it does not happen that a four-year period is placed on the later part of the 30s and the bridge is closed, the access road is closed, and large costs are incurred for the business sector. The consequences for Sweden would be enormous.
Infrastruktur- och bostadsministern Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! It has not been done sufficiently before, and mistakes have been made; so Kerstin Lundgren summarized what I said.
But it has not primarily been about Trafikverket. They have several times provided a basis to previous governments, which however have not taken it further or handled the various expert opinions that have been in the basis. They have rather buried them and pretended that there will not be any problem when Förbifarten opens. It is a political failure, and the previous government bears a great responsibility for this.
For both road maintenance and new investments or reinvestments regarding the road network, they have almost clinically gone in and removed various measures that would have been important for both the total defense's and the business community's needs and for everyday life to work for ordinary people.
This error will not be repeated. The Government has already given a very clear message within the framework that has been adopted and where the figures are anchored in the Riksdag regarding maintenance. There, we are now placing the billions that should have been in the ground a long time ago. Half of the budget goes to this.
It means that the government will also be careful with the priorities we make for the remaining part, which will go towards the development of the infrastructure. I can assure Kerstin Lundgren that "earlier and faster" will continue to be the guiding principle.
The aspects that the member has highlighted today regarding the specific object and redundancy to the capital are well known from before based on the materials we have from both the Armed Forces and the Transport Administration. But I would like to thank Kerstin Lundgren for the commitment to the issue.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.