Response to interpellation 2025/26:449 on the Southern Main Line and double track Alvesta-Växjö
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
KD argues that the government is making a historic investment in transport infrastructure 1. KD prioritizes addressing the maintenance debt and argues that one should not promise more than can be kept 2. KD considers it reasonable to wait with investments in the railway until it is clear whether a new hospital is to be built 3. KD emphasizes the importance of cost control 3 and argues that the triangle track in Alvesta and reinforced maintenance measures are important for capacity 3. S considers that the whole country should have functioning infrastructure so that labor markets can grow and companies can develop 4. S argues that double tracks were needed to expand the labor market region and facilitate recruitment of healthcare personnel 4. KD considers it important to have reliable infrastructure throughout the country 5. KD argues that it is necessary to maintain the pace of maintenance work and protect taxpayers' money 5. KD considers it urgent to investigate where the capacity shortages are and what can be addressed in the future 5.
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)
Madam Speaker! Robert Olesen has asked me what timetable I consider reasonable to achieve a double track between Alvesta and Växjö, and when this track can be in operation for full traffic. Robert Olesen has further asked me if I intend to take measures to enable an investment in a double track between Alvesta and Växjö and further on the Södra stambanan.
In the infrastructure bill The Way to a Reliable Transport Infrastructure – so that all of Sweden can function (prop. 2024/25:28), the government clarified in 2024 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.
The economic framework for the next planning period, 2026–2037, amounts to 1,171 billion kronor. It is a historically large investment. The Government has increased the infrastructure framework by over 200 billion kronor in fixed prices compared to the previous planning period. The Government prioritizes maintaining the existing transport system and prioritizes maintenance while the transport system can be developed.
Trafikverket has had the government's mandate to develop a proposal for a national plan for the transport infrastructure for the period 2026–2037. Trafikverket has proposed that the expansion of double tracks on Räppe–Växjö should be excluded from the national plan. The reason is, among other things, weak profitability. Trafikverket needs to identify the right measures with the right design and content ahead of the next plan revision.
The Government makes no other assessment than the Transport Administration and has in the plan chosen to prioritize other projects that benefit the region, so that as many as possible can receive as much benefit as possible from the transport system.
Finally, I want to address Robert Olesen's claim that the appropriations for the railway have decreased. That is not true. As I began by saying, the economic framework for the planning period 2026–2037 is 1,171 billion kronor. It is a historic investment and an increase of over 200 billion kronor in fixed prices. Both funds for railway maintenance and funds for investments in the railway system also increase in fixed prices as a result of this.
The government is therefore, contrary to what is claimed, making a historic investment in Sweden's transport infrastructure.
Robert Olesen (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer!
I have submitted this interpellation because the question of the double track between Alvesta and Växjö is crucial for Kronoberg's development. It is about the commuters who every day must get to work or to their studies. It is about the companies' opportunities to recruit staff and transport goods. It is about punctuality, robustness, and that the entire railway system of southern Sweden actually functions.
The stretch between Alvesta and Växjö is not just any railway stretch. Alvesta is an important railway junction. Växjö is a growing regional center and an engine in the region. Between the towns runs one of the most heavily loaded single-track sections in the country. When capacity fails there, it does not only affect Kronoberg. The Kust till kust-banan is affected, as is the Södra stambanan and the possibility of linking the labor markets in all of Southern Sweden.
Madam Speaker! I asked the Minister what timetable is reasonable to achieve a double track between Alvesta and Växjö and when the track can be in operation for full traffic. But in the answer, I receive neither a timetable, construction start, phase division, nor any concrete measure. Instead, I get the answer that Trafikverket has proposed that the double track Räppe–Växjö, i.e., the first phase of the double track Alvesta–Växjö, should be removed from the national plan. The Government makes no other assessment but settles for this.
It is actually this that is the most important message in the response: that the government accepts that the first stage of the double track is removed.
Then the Minister tries to hide this behind large total sums – the government speaks of 1,171 billion kronor and a historic investment. But, Madam Speaker, for Kronoberg's part, it does not help that the government speaks of large frameworks if the concrete investment needed in our region simultaneously disappears. You cannot travel by train on a total framework. You cannot solve the capacity shortage between Alvesta and Växjö with a press release. And you cannot build the future of Kronoberg on yesterday's single track.
Madam Speaker! This is also about priorities. When the government speaks about the Södra stambanan in Skåne, they highlight the need for capacity, and they speak about punctuality, commuters, freight traffic, and growth. These are perfectly reasonable arguments, but they also apply in Kronoberg.
If more tracks are needed to strengthen the Södra stambanan in Skåne, the connections to the Södra stambanan must also function. Otherwise, capacity is built in one end while the bottlenecks remain in the other.
Double track between Alvesta and Växjö is not a local request. It is a necessary investment for a robust railway system in all of southern Sweden. My question is therefore whether the Minister agrees. You have traveled on these railway sections and seen what capacity shortage we have. When can we get a double track?
Infrastruktur- och bostadsministern Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! Yes, it is as Robert Olesen says: There are capacity shortages, not only here but in large parts of the railway system and the infrastructure in our elongated country. The needs are very great. That can be seen in several parts of the country.
That is why it is important to make careful prioritizations. It is important to see where there is the greatest need to make investments here and now. What we from the government's side have seen as the highest priority issue is to address the maintenance debt that has built up over decades.
On the railway side, the maintenance debt is over 90 billion kronor. Now, for the first time, there is a plan to tackle it and eliminate it by 2050. But it will require continued high priority when it comes to getting out as much maintenance work as possible. This year is a record year with 1,800 maintenance measures. Since I became Minister for Infrastructure and Housing, the number of track replacements in Sweden has tripled, to give one example. This work must continue.
What Robert Olesen is requesting are promises for something in the future for which there are currently no funds in national plans. I will not be a minister who promises more than I can deliver. To promise more than one can deliver is not to take responsibility.
The previous national plan, for which the Social Democrats are responsible, was criticized not only by me and others on the opposite side of politics but also by the National Audit Office because it promised more than it could deliver. That was actually the headline of the entire review: promises more than it can deliver.
It is very important not to give promises or set dates when there is no coverage for it. I will not do that. I understand that it can create disappointment for Robert Olesen and others. But it is important to make priorities and not to promise more than one can keep.
What we are doing now is to accelerate the upgrading of the Södra stambanan. But we also establish Trafikverket's proposal in the national plan to begin a capacity study for the main lines in southern Sweden. I do not, of course, exclude that the connecting section to the Södra stambanan will be able to be a part of that study work; it is included in the national plan. I hope this will at least be a positive announcement in this debate.
When it comes to the section originating from the national plan, the planning and the argumentation for that section and also the station in Räppe being included in the national plan were based on the fact that a regional hospital was planned. That was the basis for this being included. Now, the motive for it is not as strong because it will not be implemented. Then the motive for the investment is not as strong. One of the motives for it being previously included and looked at is therefore no longer valid. Then one must, Madam Speaker, be prepared to reconsider.
It does not mean that it will never be possible to have an expansion. On the contrary, we have given a mandate to Trafikverket to investigate this in the long term. But when the needs are so great, it is important that one does not, despite the fact that we have a historically high budget and a large framework, promise more than one can keep. That is the reason why I cannot answer today as to what year this can be in operation or even be included in planning. I hope that there will be respect for that in the chamber, Madam Speaker.
Robert Olesen (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the small straw that you nevertheless hold out when it comes to the possibility that something might happen in the future.
The Minister says, Madam Speaker, that the government has chosen to prioritize other objects. I want to ask which objects are specifically meant, which would benefit Kronoberg, and what would replace the double track between Alvesta and Växjö in the meantime, given that the capacity shortage exists there already, as well as what measures can solve it. If the answer is that nothing replaces the double track, the government must be honest about that.
The previous argumentation for the dual track remains. I believe the Minister actually knows that there is indeed a decision to investigate the issue regarding the hospital once again. The previous government in Region Kronoberg chose to stop this, but the current Social Democratic government has taken up the issue again and is also looking into building a new hospital – either at the site where it is located today or at the site where it would be located according to the previous investigation, that is, out in Räppe, with an associated station and the like. That question is therefore not dead.
This was also presented to Trafikverket before the national plan was established, which means it should have been included. I also think the government needs to take that into account when it is now being removed. The previous government included 375 million for this project, but now it is zero.
Even though I can be pleased that I get a small straw, it would have been much more fun to be able to tell the people of Kronoberg that this will happen and that these funds are being sent. In relation to the large sums that the minister speaks of, 375 million is not much money in the context of achieving a solution to the capacity shortage that I, as a former chairman of the municipal board and regional councilor, have worked on for 20 years.
This is not a new issue. It is not about us needing to solve something by 2050; we need to solve it now.
Infrastruktur- och bostadsministern Andreas Carlson (KD)
Madam Speaker! I have noted that a new hospital is now being investigated. The location is, as I understand it, not yet decided, and it is reasonable to wait for this before locking in an investment in the railway. One of the motives for including it earlier was precisely that a hospital was to be built, so it is reasonable to wait for that.
When it comes to further measures, the triangle tracks in Alvesta are included, which will increase capacity and mean that the connection between the Södra stambanan and the Kust till kust-banan west of Alvesta will be improved. Additional measures in Kronoberg involving strengthened maintenance are also included. Every state road in Kronoberg County will be renovated.
It has been a problem previously, Madam Speaker, that the maintenance measures have not really been visible when looking at what one receives in their part of the country. That is why we have now asked Trafikverket to produce a more precise picture of what the maintenance debt looks like. Where is it, and what will it look like in 2037, when the heavy investments in road maintenance have been rolled out and the maintenance debt has been built down?
Then it will look green. Today it is red in many places. That means there is a maintenance debt. In the future, in just twelve years, it will be completely green and thus only planned maintenance. In all activities, one has maintenance needs, but one has no deferred maintenance lagging behind. This everyone in Kronoberg and in the whole country will notice.
It is however important to say again that when the needs are so great, one must be prepared to make priorities. I would have been one of the happiest here in the chamber if we could have said that we can move forward and invest in more stretches. But against the background of the maintenance debt that has built up over decades on both the railway and road side, there were therefore approximately 600 billion left that could go towards new investments. Much was tied up in measures because there were many objects from previous plans that did not have full funding.
When we have cleaned up many of the deficiencies created earlier, the room for maneuver has been limited. Then one must be careful with the millions and, as I usually say, also with the thousands. Cost control is not just about keeping track of the billions not spiraling away, but also about the millions. To say that 375 million kronor is not that much, so that it can be allowed to roll on, is not to take responsibility.
There are many hundred-million-kronor items that have spiraled out of control over the years. That is where it begins. If we are to have a good culture of safeguarding the taxpayers' money, one must not promise more than one can keep. One also cannot simply let expenditures continue if the underlying conditions change.
Now we have a national plan. It is decided. It also contains a research mandate to look at main line capacity in southern Sweden in the long term. It is reinforced on the Södra stambanan with the triangle track, with additional measures in maintenance and reinvestments that increase the speed and with the maintenance trains that Trafikverket has contracted. They ensure that maintenance can be carried out on one track while simultaneously running at full capacity on the track next to it, because it becomes a protected environment for those who work. It means that we can perform more maintenance and at the same time let the trains run. We have a great need to also have high capacity while we are to perform maintenance at a record pace.
This is no simple task, but that is where the priority needs to lie even moving forward. In that case, we unfortunately cannot promise more than we can keep. On the other hand, we are now ensuring that the Swedish railway is upgraded.
Robert Olesen (S)
Madam Speaker! Let me elaborate a bit on where the hospital is located today. It is already located today along the double track that is missing. Regardless of which location one chooses to build the new hospital on, it is located along a single-track railway. This means that we will have the same concerns in the future as we do today if we do not get it right.
An expansion would mean that we would expand the labor market region and ensure that we can also recruit healthcare personnel from further away than today, if we could get double tracks that can lead to more traffic and more commuting.
For us Social Democrats, it is obvious that the entire country should have functioning infrastructure, not just the largest cities, not just where the calculations on paper look best, but also where investments are required so that labor markets can grow, so that people can commute and companies can develop. Kronoberg does not need more "maybe"; we need decisions.
Therefore, I would like to conclude by asking the Minister: Does the Minister consider today's single track between Alvesta and Växjö to be sufficient for future traffic? How and when will this be addressed, if you do not think it is sufficient for future traffic?
And I also want to wish a pleasant summer to the Speaker, to the Minister and to the Presidium.
Infrastruktur- och bostadsministern Andreas Carlson (KD)
Mr. Speaker! I hear that it is important for the Social Democrats that there is a reliable infrastructure throughout the country. Therefore, it is with concern that I see that one is still cutting back on road maintenance by 45 billion. This leads to the fact that the maintenance debt will increase over the coming twelve years. This is stated in the Social Democrats' own motion.
What is guiding for whether one can trust the Social Democrats' words is what we can see in the rearview mirror. The National Audit Office has been clear that you promised more than you could keep. It even stood in the headline of their report on the previous national plan, National plan for transport infrastructure – promises more than it can keep.
I see a need for upgrades in many places in Sweden. I see that there may be reasons to make continued smart investments to increase capacity. That is why Trafikverket now has a mandate to look at the main line capacity in southern Sweden as well, in the long term. It is an announcement that I hope will be well received.
Then it is reasonable to return to the question of station placement and so on once the decision has been made. It can be done in the next plan revision, but it is also important then to maintain the pace of the maintenance work and to safeguard the taxpayers' money, so that we renovate Swedish infrastructure and do not return to a situation where maintenance is neglected and maintenance is pushed into the future.
Many of the problems we have today are consequences of decades of deprioritization and lack of interest in maintenance work, which is one of the most basic and important foundations in the work to also secure future travel. Much of future transport will take place on infrastructure and tracks that we have today. Therefore, it is of course also important to investigate where the capacity shortages are and what can be addressed moving forward.
Thank you for the debate! I also want to wish a happy summer.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.