Response to interpellations 2025/26:398, 401 and 406 on flight routes

Infrastruktur- och bostadsministern Andreas Carlson (KD)

Madam Speaker! Marie Olsson has asked me how I intend to ensure that accessibility to Stockholm for residents and companies in northern and western Dalarna is not worsened if the Mora–Arlanda flight route is discontinued, if I intend to take measures so that the general public service obligation for the Mora–Arlanda flight route can continue, and how I and the government consider regional airports' importance for Sweden's preparedness and total defense in the work with state support for air traffic.

Kalle Olsson has asked me if I intend to take measures to ensure that the general transport obligation on the flight route Östersund–Umeå continues after 2027.

Peter Hedberg has asked me if I intend to take measures so that the general traffic obligation for the flight route Kramfors–Arlanda can continue, and how I intend to ensure that the accessibility to Stockholm for residents, companies, and public actors in Kramfors and Sollefteå municipalities is not worsened if the flight route Kramfors–Arlanda is discontinued.

I choose to answer the interpellations in a context.

Aviation is an important part of the transport system. Especially in a country like Sweden, with long distances and many sparsely populated areas, aviation is important for domestic travel and also has great significance for Sweden's economy, competitiveness, and openness towards the rest of the world.

The government has therefore taken several important measures to strengthen the competitiveness of aviation and airports and to improve the conditions for good accessibility by air.

To give some examples: The aviation tax is abolished from July 1, 2025. The Government has also decided that approximately 60 agencies shall report how they ensure transport-neutral business trips. On the Government's proposal, the Riksdag has on two occasions decided to increase the total state contribution to municipalities for operating support to non-state airports by over 400 percent. Furthermore, on the Government's proposal, the Riksdag has increased the state compensation to the emergency airports starting from this year.

For Mora airport, which is also a preparedness airport, the operational support has increased from approximately 2 million kronor in 2023 to approximately 8 million kronor in 2025. For Kramfors-Sollefteå Höga Kusten airport, the operational support has increased from approximately 7.5 million kronor in 2023 to approximately 8 million kronor in 2025.

A starting point for the government is that regular scheduled air traffic shall be operated on commercial terms. In some cases, however, it is not possible to operate commercially viable and regular air traffic. In these situations, there may be a need to establish air routes with a public service obligation to ensure the accessibility of different regions to Sweden's capital. For that work, Trafikverket is the responsible authority.

Trafikverket has recently conducted an investigation to provide a basis for the agency's upcoming decisions on which flight routes should have a public service obligation and, if necessary, be tendered before the current operator agreements expire in October 2027. Trafikverket refers its investigation in the usual order to gather views on the proposal. I am following the matter closely.

I can state that the conditions for the procured traffic on the flight route Östersund–Umeå differ from the other procured routes. In proposition 1992/93:150, proposals were submitted regarding air traffic between Östersund and Umeå. The Riksdag rejected the government's proposal. The instruction for Trafikverket therefore includes that the authority shall ensure that there is regular air traffic on the Östersund–Umeå route.

To remove the general traffic obligation on the line, an approval from the Riksdag and an amendment of the ordinance (2010:185) with instructions for Trafikverket are therefore required. No work is being undertaken to amend the ordinance within the Government Offices.

The question of funds for the procured transport is something that the government assesses in the annual work with the state budget.

In conclusion: Regarding the question of regional airports' importance for Sweden's preparedness and total defense, I would like to point out that such questions are also covered by the ongoing assignment that the government's special investigator on the airport area has.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Marie Olsson (S)

Madam Speaker! I would like to begin by thanking the Minister for the answer to the interpellation.

Mora Airport was inaugurated as early as 1980, and it was built both out of the need for civil preparedness and to be able to be used for military purposes. The airport has therefore existed for 46 years. It received a traffic obligation only in 2023, and now there is a proposal to remove the traffic obligation.

The government has stated that all of Sweden should be able to live and develop. At the same time, Trafikverket is now proposing that the general public service obligation for the flight line between Mora Airport and Stockholm Arlanda Airport should not be renewed. The proposal risks significantly worsening accessibility for residents and businesses in northern and western Dalarna.

Mora Airport functions today as a regional hub for several municipalities, such as Älvdalen, Orsa, Malung-Sälen and Vansbro. Almost half of the passengers to the airport come from municipalities other than Mora. Trafikverket's analysis focuses to an all too high degree on Mora as a locality and therefore underestimates the airport's importance for the larger regional surroundings.

In municipalities such as Mora, Älvdalen and Orsa, where I myself live, accessibility to Stockholm is already very limited today. Without the flight connection, travel times increase significantly, and the possibility of traveling during the day for work, contact with authorities and business activities deteriorates considerably. It will largely not be possible to get to Stockholm during the day. This specific flight connection has a relatively high cost-coverage rate in comparison with several other lines that Trafikverket nevertheless proposes should receive continued support.

The general traffic obligation was also introduced, as I said earlier, only in 2023. This means that the conditions for this line have not even had time to fully stabilize.

In addition to regional development, there is also the security policy perspective. In a situation where Sweden is once again building up its total defense, the civil infrastructure plays an important role.

Regional airports can be crucial for preparedness, crisis management, and military mobility. Mora airport is built to have the capacity to be an important military airport. The activity at this regional airport is now at risk of being weakened, and it raises questions about how the government weighs transport policy, regional policy, and total defense as a whole.

Now the minister has answered, and the answers are non-binding: that aviation is important, that the aviation tax has been abolished, that the state support for standby airports has increased, and that the minister is following the issue closely.

None of these answers help us maintain the public service obligation at Mora Airport, and none of them are actually answers to the questions I have posed in the interpellation. In light of that, I want to give the Minister the opportunity to be a bit more concrete than in the initial answer.

I ask therefore again: Does the Minister intend to take any concrete measures, involving more than following the question closely, so that the general public service obligation for the Mora–Arlanda flight route can continue?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Kalle Olsson (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer to the interpellation!

It is a somewhat special construction that it is included in the instructions to Trafikverket to ensure traffic between Östersund and Umeå. It is also not the first time that Trafikverket has submitted a request to the government to be exempted from this assignment.

I note and welcome the Minister's answer in this part, and I hope and believe that it can dispel some of the concern. At the same time, it is true that the devil is in the details, so when the Minister returns to the rostrum, he is welcome to clarify exactly what this entails.

There is currently no work being carried out in the government to remove the general traffic obligation, says the Minister. Does that also mean that no such work will be started tomorrow either? We must nevertheless take into account that the basis was submitted to Trafikverket quite recently.

When it comes to this basis, I personally think it leaves a great deal to be desired. It is pointed out, among other things, that there are alternatives to the procured flights between Östersund and Umeå. One can travel by both train and bus as well as a combination of these modes of transport, and so it is.

The problem is that it will not become an attractive journey. We are talking about a route of only 36 miles, and one must consider which target groups it is that usually travel by plane today. It is healthcare staff, patients, patients' relatives, government employees, and actors in the business sector.

With public transport, the journey takes a long time, five or six hours. One cannot start the journey from Östersund in the morning and have a full working day in Umeå; instead, it requires traveling the day before and staying a night in a hotel. That, of course, adds to the cost.

I shall mention another thing while we are on the subject of transport modes, timetables, and costs. Trafikverket also points out that one can fly commercially between Östersund and Umeå via Stockholm. So it is, and it is a fairly fast journey. One can get down to three or four hours. But Trafikverket carefully avoids telling what it costs. If one wants to travel today from Östersund to Umeå and back tomorrow, it costs, Madam Speaker, 11,195 kronor round trip without checked baggage. One almost wonders why Trafikverket did not highlight the possibility of hiring a private jet, if money is not a factor in this context.

The authority also asks the question: Why should just Östersund, a relatively prosperous municipality, have a flight route to Umeå, another relatively prosperous municipality? Kiruna has no flight route to Umeå, and Gällivare has no flight route to Umeå.

I would never, Madam Speaker, dream of creating such a contradiction and pitting towns in the inland of Norrland against each other in that way, especially not when we are talking about transport opportunities, and I think it is sad that a state agency does just that. Why should it always be the places that have the longest distances, worst roads and least public transport that are pitted against each other?

When one speaks about Jämtland County, one must understand that Östersund, the only city, gathers the needs of the surrounding municipalities. If one is a resident of Åre, Bräcke, or Krokom and intends to travel to Umeå, one does so via Östersund.

Let me return to my initial question, Madam Speaker. Can we simply assume that no work will be started in the Government Offices tomorrow to change or scrap the Östersund–Umeå flight route?

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Peter Hedberg (S)

Madam Speaker! For my part, I could have opened this debate by paraphrasing Selma Lagerlöf and saying "Finally, the cabinet member stood in the speaker's chair." But honestly, I would have preferred to skip the debate, for the reason that I thought the question regarding Höga Kusten Airport was settled.

In 2024, the government announced that it did not intend to proceed with the Airport Investigation, which at that time had presented proposals to abolish the traffic obligation at Höga Kusten Airport. Later in 2024, I attended the 50th anniversary of Höga Kusten Airport. I even had the honor of giving the opening speech, not so much because I was considered to have saved the airport, but because I was the chairman of the municipal council. I could observe that there were significantly more people looking at all the different types of cool airplanes than listening to the speech. But what I felt that day and what I encountered from so incredibly many visitors was the incredible faith in the future that the government's announcement at the time had given.

Now, Trafikverket has announced that they again believe this flight route should be decommissioned. I submitted a written question to the Minister earlier, and the Minister notes in the response to the interpellation that funds for contracted traffic are provided within the framework of the budget work. I will return to that later.

In Kramfors and Sollefteå, there is currently a growth in both the military and civil defense. Västernorrlands regemente I 21 has increased the number of conscript soldiers from 40 during the first year of training to 150 during the current year. This will increase further during the coming years, and in two years the plan is approximately 400 conscripts.

For the Armed Forces, the flight route Kramfors–Arlanda is very important. Many conscripts are residents of the Mälardalen region and therefore travel home several weekends per month. The personnel at the regiment also use the airport for business trips to Stockholm. The airport is also important from a military-strategic perspective, as the Armed Forces has large training and shooting ranges in Sollefteå that are used in both national and international contexts. The proximity to deep-water harbors, airports, and railway tracks is therefore of great importance. Furthermore, the Civil Preparedness Authority has civil defense training on Sandö in Kramfors and is therefore in need of the flight route to enable efficient travel.

This airport is jointly owned by Kramfors and Sollefteå municipalities, but the Armed Forces and MCF are state agencies that need the airport and express this very clearly. But it is so – and it has been expressed many times before by the representatives for the owners, as well as by myself – that without a general public service obligation on this flight route, it will not be possible to maintain it with municipal funds. It is also not reasonable given the large state interests that exist in the region.

Madam Speaker! I have asked whether the Minister is prepared to take measures so that general traffic obligation can continue on this flight route. In the interpellation answer, the Minister has not explicitly answered that question, and the only thing I can see that is linked to the question is precisely that funds are prepared within the framework of the budget work.

It is not a very clear statement, and I want to return to the Minister's answer to my written question where I think he was somewhat clearer. There he answered as follows: ”The Government has not made any other decision in the matter than the one that Peter Hedberg refers to, namely not to proceed with the airport investigation's proposal in the part concerning Höga Kusten Airport.”

I do not believe, Madam Speaker, that the Minister wants me to make myself the sole interpreter of the government's will. Therefore, I would like the Minister to explain a little more clearly whether this means that the traffic obligation at Höga Kusten Airport will remain as the government has previously promised.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Infrastruktur- och bostadsministern Andreas Carlson (KD)

Madam Speaker! First, I would like to thank the members for their commitment. I note a shift in the aviation policy from the Social Democrats, where they are now truly emphasizing the care for the procured domestic air traffic. I hope that we can see today's announcement as a shift for the entire party. It would be a major news if the Social Democrats were to settle accounts with the previously conducted policy, which was possibly influenced by the cooperation party Miljöpartiet's various objections against aviation. Miljöpartiet wants to return to the old order, which was about to ruin Swedish aviation, and not only reintroduce the aviation tax but also double it.

Therefore, Madam Speaker, I thought it was important to give a broader answer than only regarding the individual flight routes that the members highlight. The answer to the questions linked to the routes in the procured traffic that the members raise shall be interpreted by what the government has done to strengthen domestic aviation. That is what I mean: If the commitment that we encounter today from the Social Democrats were reflected in more areas, it would be good for Swedish domestic aviation and for accessibility in our elongated country.

So, to the rather concrete follow-up questions. Marie Olsson asks if I intend to take concrete measures. Yes, that is what our track record shows that we have done. We have acted to strengthen aviation, not only because it is important for Swedish industry, the Swedish labor market, and the Swedish business community's opportunities to sign deals globally, but also for the socially important part of aviation, where not least the aspects that the members raise are very important for the government.

Do I intend to take concrete measures? Yes, but I cannot anticipate the budget process. That no decisions have been made, I believe, is an important message in this debate, which Peter Hedberg is also touching upon. The Government has not made any other decision. We made a decision in 2024 not to proceed with the proposals that existed at that time regarding removing the traffic obligation to Höga Kusten Airport, and we have not made any other decision.

We have taken note of Trafikverket's proposal, but Trafikverket's proposal is now out for consultation, and when I say that we are following it closely, it also means that we have not made any decisions yet. These are decisions that Trafikverket has discretion over, but it is of course a budget issue. Therefore, it will be an important issue for Kristdemokraterna in future budget negotiations.

Kalle Olsson poses a counter-question to my answer that no work is being undertaken: Will work begin tomorrow to change the regulation that would lead to the decommission of the procured air traffic between Östersund and Umeå? No, no such work will begin tomorrow. We are not pitting different parts against each other.

I think it is an important point that Kalle Olsson makes in his reasoning. Against the background of the development that is now occurring in aviation, we see rather that there could be more of these types of point-to-point solutions. We neither have nor will begin any work to change the regulation concerning that specific route. On the other hand, we have seen that the setup we have in Sweden, where the state procures traffic, could be complemented by also allowing regions to procure traffic so that more lines can be linked together in our elongated country, not least with the development of electric aviation which is particularly suitable for point-to-point solutions. There are, therefore, great opportunities ahead.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Marie Olsson (S)

Madam Speaker! I can assure the Minister that we Social Democrats in northern Dalarna have long advocated for there to be a traffic obligation at Mora Airport. But if the Transport Administration's proposal to withdraw the traffic obligation becomes a reality, northern and western Dalarna now risk being further isolated. It is a choice that the government must take responsibility for if more money is not provided.

Air traffic between Mora and Arlanda is not a luxury but a fundamental prerequisite for accessibility, business, and community services in a fairly large geographical hinterland. As I said earlier, Trafikverket's investigation focuses far too much on Mora as a locality. Mora Airport is a regional hub for municipalities that have major accessibility deficiencies. This applies, for example, to Älvdalen and Orsa, municipalities that completely lack fast communications to Stockholm.

In Älvdalen, seven out of eight availability criteria are met at the dark red level without aviation. Mora airport improves five of them and reduces the total deficiency by a total of thirteen steps. Otherwise, the travel time to Stockholm increases from three hours by plane to closer to five hours by train and bus. The same applies to Orsa.

Almost half of the travelers, therefore, have their starting point in another municipality. Malungsfärden, Orsa, Älvdalen, and Vansbro are clear parts of the catchment area. An assessment of this flight path based on municipal boundaries therefore completely misses how it looks in our countryside out in northern and western Dalarna.

Trafikverket's proposal was, as mentioned, also difficult to understand economically. Mora–Arlanda has a cost-recovery rate of 22 percent. That is higher than several other flight routes that are proposed to receive continued support.

Mora Airport only received the general public transport obligation in 2023. It is too early to conclude that the route is not viable. Historically, the route has had approximately 4,000 passengers per year. The Transportverket figures showing that there were previously 7,000 passengers per year refer to a period when there were tourist flights from Ängelholm. That should not be counted in at all. It becomes directly misleading as a comparison.

Today's travel shows clearly that the Mora–Arlanda line is used for business and service trips, and customer satisfaction is actually very high. A shutdown of regular flights also risks having consequences far beyond the flight line itself. If the traffic disappears, the possibility to maintain the daily operations and expertise at the airport also decreases. In the long run, it could threaten the entire operation.

It is easy to dismantle functioning aviation infrastructure, but rebuilding it takes a long time and is complicated. If the government is serious about the ambition that all of Sweden should live, one cannot accept decisions that further worsen accessibility in already vulnerable parts of the country. If one simultaneously wants to strengthen Sweden's preparedness and total defense, it is even stupider to weaken a regional airport of strategic importance.

Subsidized flight routes exist where it is not possible for airlines to operate commercial traffic. Should the Mora–Arlanda flight route disappear, it will become extremely difficult for the municipality responsible for the airport to continue the operations. Therefore, the state must provide funds and ensure that the air traffic between Mora and Arlanda is allowed to remain. The Minister has answered that it shall be included in the budget work, and that is a somewhat vague answer. I would like to have a more concrete answer on whether the Minister is prepared to do everything possible to ensure that the funds needed to maintain the traffic at Mora airport are provided in the budget.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Kalle Olsson (S)

Madam Speaker! The Östersund–Umeå line is important. I thank the Minister again for the somewhat clearer answer. It is important to keep in mind. It is about the interaction between Jämtlands län and Västerbotten. Jämtland Härjedalen is part of the northern healthcare region, and we have our regional hospital in Umeå. It is therefore of great importance that we have good communications there. But also for the universities and the labor market, the exchange with Västerbotten and Umeå is significant. Umeå is, after all, something of an administrative hub for northern and central Sweden.

As hopefully appeared from my first post, I am partially critical of the material that Trafikverket has prepared. I believe that a broader perspective is necessary when analyzing the procured traffic. I would really wish that the government did so and allowed more criteria to be included in the material before upcoming decisions.

Madam Speaker! In the end, all the different transport needs in northern Sweden depend on the government taking responsibility for financing the state transport agreements, i.e., the transport that is important but not commercially viable. After the cost increases of recent years, that question is even more acute. The government has not compensated Trafikverket for the cost increases in the transport agreements.

The National Audit Office recently presented an audit of the transport agreements. There, it is written that since 2011, the appropriation for transport agreements has remained relatively unchanged in nominal terms, apart from a few years with temporary increases, which means that the real value of the appropriation has decreased over time. It is clear that with such a continuous reduction year after year, nothing else remains for Trafikverket in the end than to approach the government with proposals for cuts.

One can almost feel the frustration that Trafikverket feels regarding the economic realities. They write in their submission: ”Trafikverket's appropriation for transport agreements is very strained. In recent years, costs have increased in most agreements, while the appropriation has not been increased sufficiently. Trafikverket has therefore been forced to make cuts in cooperation agreements for trains and buses and in the night train traffic to upper Norrland.” Trafikverket continues on the same theme: ”The current appropriation makes it difficult even today to maintain the traffic that is deemed justified based on the mandate.”

The government has put this appropriation on a starvation diet. Trafikverket has repeatedly pleaded for funds to maintain basic accessibility. Ultimately, it actually falls on the government to choose the path. This is not the first time the Minister for Infrastructure has been in the chamber to debate contracted traffic in northern Sweden. We have previously debated the night train traffic. Even then, the starting point from Trafikverket's side was that without more money, something must be removed.

The government and the Council of State are happy to beat their chests and say that they are allocating large sums in the national plan to eliminate the maintenance debt and improve the road standard. This is welcome, and hopefully, it will mean improvements in our part of the country. But the traffic we are talking about here today is also a part of holding the whole country together. Furthermore, it is relatively small amounts of money we are talking about, considering the large infrastructure budget. It should not be the case that the already limited accessibility in our part of the country has to become even worse just because the government prioritizes something else over traffic in northern Sweden.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Peter Hedberg (S)

Madam Speaker! Regardless of how the autumn election goes, Andreas Carlson is the holder of the mandate as Minister for Infrastructure for at least six months to come. It is during that period that the issue we are now debating is relevant.

I focused a great deal in my previous speech on the interests of the Armed Forces and MCF regarding specifically Höga Kusten Airport. But the need for the airport and the flight route Kramfors–Arlanda is naturally greater than that.

Kramfors is a municipality with just over 17,300 inhabitants. Despite the fact that we are relatively few inhabitants, we are a geographically large municipality. We have a business sector with companies that operate on a global market. They are dependent on aviation both for the supply of competence and for the opportunity for growth. This applies not least because the rail traffic on the Ostkustbanan also struggles with very large challenges and difficulties.

The flight route Kramfors–Arlanda is absolutely necessary because accessibility is so poor generally, even regarding the rail traffic. We received a promise during the 2022 election campaign from Ulf Kristersson that the double track on Ostkustbanan would be fully completed by 2035, but he has failed to deliver on that. In that case, the government must at least be able to deliver the same message as before that the public service obligation at Höga Kusten Airport will remain.

Madam Speaker! I mentioned earlier the joy that many experienced in 2024 when the airport celebrated 50 years. But what I have encountered in my conversations after the Transport Agency's proposal became known is not only concern but also a very great irritation over the inconsistency in this issue. A couple of years ago, an investigator proposed that the flight route Kramfors–Arlanda should be discontinued. At that time, the government, very wisely, said that the flight route shall remain. Andreas Carlson knows that I have praised the government for this previously. But completely suddenly, two years later, another announcement from the Transport Agency appeared with a proposal for discontinuation. That is why I want the government to give a clear answer: Does the decision from 2024 stand or not?

I do not know if the statement that no other decision has been made is as clear as the Minister wants to make it appear. I can state that instead of focusing on the long-term development of both the business sector and the airport, the municipal leaders, the officials, the business sector, the Armed Forces, and a non-negligible number of private individuals are now forced to spend considerable time handling an issue that one actually believed was already settled.

What the Minister says now is that no definitive decision can be made before the autumn budget is presented. That is, in October. If I am counting correctly, that is also after the election. I think that the Minister would gladly be able to give some advice to Sollefteå and Kramfors municipalities, which own the airport. How should one act during those seven months? What should one do while waiting for a decision? If one is to plan for the future, there must be clear decisions.

Madam Speaker! Some people at home have asked me what I think. It happens everywhere from in the taxi on the way to the airport to when I meet people at Coop. They ask what I think will happen and what the government will do. I must admit that I have had a fairly high level of confidence in the government's decisions from 2024, but I am starting to get a little worried now that I hear how defensive the minister is.

Given the positive development the airport has had and considering the needs of the Armed Forces, MCF, and the business community, and the fact that Höga Kusten Airport has already been identified as one of two airports where the public service obligation shall remain, I have said all this for the sake of clarity. Now I would like to know if the Minister can give that confirmation.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Infrastruktur- och bostadsministern Andreas Carlson (KD)

Madam Speaker! I thank you very much for the commitment.

The announcement that the government has given stands. We have not made any other decision, and that means we have no other announcement. What Peter Hedberg is now describing as an announcement from Trafikverket is still only a proposal, and this proposal is out for consultation. Those who have comments on the proposal can submit them through a consultation process, which will, of course, form the basis for the decision to be made. It is a concrete piece of advice. Otherwise, I refrain from giving advice.

What we are discussing here in the chamber is the situation after October 2027, when the agreements expire. There is plenty of time for supplements in a budget. I have already described in the debate what will be an important starting point for the Christian Democrats and for me as Minister for Infrastructure if I am granted renewed confidence after the election. The reason why I cannot give more precise answers than that today is that I cannot anticipate the budget process and that, before that, there will be an election.

Marie Olsson is welcome to describe it as a floating answer, but one could just as well direct the question to the Social Democrats. Will the Social Democrats be able to hold fast to the prioritization we hear about here in the chamber in a budget negotiation? It could become a budget negotiation with, for example, the Green Party, if misfortune strikes and we are not allowed to continue with the aviation-friendly policy that binds together our elongated country rather than breaking up a functioning domestic market, which is already having a very tough time. That could happen if one, for example, introduces and doubles the aviation tax.

With respect for the democratic order we have in Sweden and that we will have an election, I cannot say exactly how a government will act in October 2026 before the agreement expires in October 2027. An important priority for me, however, will be that the line we have established during these years remains and is deepened.

I have already given notice regarding Höga Kusten Airport, and I also say today that the government has not given any other notice since then.

There are good points in both Marie Olsson's and Kalle Olsson's reasoning. The direction forward should be judged based on what the government has done to strengthen Swedish domestic aviation during the years I have been Minister for Infrastructure. But I obviously cannot sign for other parties in a potential other government basis. Therefore, it would be presumptuous of me to say today exactly how the budget process will turn out.

What has caused the costs to skyrocket in the budget for the procured transport is primarily the emergency agreement that Trafikverket has signed with SJ for the night train traffic. It has pushed out other large parts of the budget. The government has acted so that it does not have even greater consequences than it already has. It will, of course, be an important issue in the budget negotiations ahead.

Regarding the maintenance debt, which Kalle Olsson mentions, I am pleased with the support and that we can now finally address the maintenance debt that exists on the roadside. We are allocating 354 billion over the next twelve years.

However, I am somewhat concerned about the Social Democrats' shadow motion on our budget. The Social Democrats want to reduce the item by a full 45 billion kronor. I appeal to the members to go home and discuss this internally. Why does one want to trim the maintenance budget which now allows us to build away the maintenance debt in Sweden? They want to remove as much as 45 billion, which would have direct consequences in the parts of the country that the members represent if Social Democratic policy goes through.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Marie Olsson (S)

Madam Speaker! We hear a lot of scaremongering from government representatives here in the chamber about a potential change of government. I look forward to a change of government so that things can be put in order. The Minister's expression was "if disaster strikes," but disaster has already struck considering Trafikverket's proposal.

I agree with Member Hedberg's speech regarding the inconsistency. Mora airport was granted traffic obligation in 2023, and now a proposal is being made to withdraw it.

If the traffic obligation is withdrawn, it will affect the possibilities for conducting emergency ambulance transport and forest fire fighting. It will also affect the possibilities of using the airport for preparedness, something to keep in mind given the security situation we are in now. It risks affecting the possibilities for business establishments in this entire large geographical area. A decisive part is, of course, being able to get to Stockholm and back during the day or being able to quickly get to Arlanda.

Furthermore, the Mora–Arlanda line has been streamlined. The flight starts in Sveg, which gets to keep the traffic obligation, stops in Mora, and then continues to Arlanda. One is already flying over Mora on the way to Arlanda. With Trafikverket's proposal, one shall no longer be allowed to make a stopover in Mora.

The municipalities, especially Mora municipality, have invested a lot of money but also a lot of work into getting a functioning airport. If the public service obligation is withdrawn, the entire operation is threatened. Furthermore, municipalities are not allowed to step in and support individual flight routes. There are court decisions on that. It is therefore an impossibility. Only the state can do it.

From the perspective of the residents of the entire northern and western parts of Dalarna, and for the sake of the business community, emergency medical care, preparedness, and both the civil and military defense, I hope that the minister and the government will help, instead of just following the question and thereby perhaps hindering, Mora airport.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Kalle Olsson (S)

Madam Speaker! I, like Marie Olsson, am also very much looking forward to a change of power this autumn so that we can get a Social Democratic-funded transport agreement. For several years, we have shown that we are prepared to provide the money needed to keep the traffic running.

Since the early 90s, ever since 1993, there has been flights between Östersund and Umeå based on government and parliamentary decisions. The fact that the line has survived for so long, despite some resistance from the responsible authority, is worth some reflection.

The Minister has in various contexts emphasized that Sweden is a country that needs aviation, and I agree with that. In my home municipality Östersund, for example, we have now revised our travel policy so that aviation can also be used for business trips, which I think is good. It is unfortunate to pit modes of transport against each other. On the contrary, we need more opportunities for travel. Above all, we need it in northern Sweden to make the equation work.

I heard the Minister mention electric aviation, and I want to conclude on that note. I believe that is where the future lies. We are on the threshold of electric aviation's entry onto the transport policy scene. This is very exciting, and it is exactly on lines like these that we could achieve a shift.

My simple appeal and my message is that I hope the government is offensive in these issues and when we come to procurement and requirements. We can of course lower the costs for gasoline and maintenance, but we can also place Sweden at the forefront. Think what a wonderful vision it is to see northern Sweden go to the forefront to transition aviation!

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Peter Hedberg (S)

Madam Speaker! I shall, for the sake of safety, since my two party colleagues have done so, also say that I naturally look forward to a change of power – so that there is no doubt about it.

I want to dwell a little on what the Minister said about it only being a proposal. Naturally, the Minister is right that there is a certain order of proceedings. The problem with that order of proceedings is that it appears incomprehensible to many, when one has already received notification of what is to apply.

This is not actually unique to the airport that I am primarily debating today, Höga Kusten Airport, but it also applies to the railway section that I mentioned earlier, Ostkustbanan. Both right-led and Social Democratic governments have issued statements on what should apply for certain stages, and then you have to start over from square one when Trafikverket withdraws them in its proposals.

So it won't just be one proposal. It will be proposals and signals that one is forced to devote large resources to handling in referral responses. I am not allowed to have props here in the chamber, but I actually have a couple of the referral responses with me. These have, of course, been worked on very quickly, because the municipalities want to send the signal: No, this won't work – the government must act.

I would like to conclude, Madam Speaker, by saying that for my municipality, where Höga Kusten Airport is located, it would be very welcome to receive a decision, not least because we have been affected by a number of difficulties that have impacted our infrastructure, for example the heavy rains that hit our county at the beginning of September last year. I can state that Kramfors municipality made a positive result for the first time in quite a while, just over 27 million. Of those, one is now forced to use 10 million to handle the aftermath of the heavy rains because no state support has been received. It would therefore be welcome to receive a decision at least regarding the question of the obligation to use Höga Kusten Airport.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)

Infrastruktur- och bostadsministern Andreas Carlson (KD)

Madam Speaker! It is interesting that when social democratic and Green Party policy is described as fear propaganda in a flight debate. It is actually consistent with the truth. It is frightening that within the Social Democrats' government base there is a party that not only wants to reintroduce the harmful aviation tax but also double it – despite the situation we have in the world around us and despite that we see aviation's importance for reasons of preparedness and when it comes to socially important aviation, ambulance care and the needs of the business sector, just as the three members from the Social Democrats have very well accounted for in this debate today. This would have very negative consequences for Swedish aviation and also for the airports and the accessibility to the locations that we have discussed today.

We do not know what will come out of the red-green lottery if the misfortune were to arrive. We saw that yesterday in Agenda, it was completely incomprehensible. Then the Social Democratic party secretary sat and almost reviewed the Centre Party's and the Left Party's posts. The Green Party was not involved then, but we know what they want to do to lay a wet blanket over Swedish aviation.

That this is described as fear propaganda might be correct – I don't know. Members and others may comment on that, but I have accounted for exactly what the situation is.

But to end with something positive, I think what Kalle Olsson described regarding Östersund, that they have changed the travel policy, is very good. During a visit to Jämtland, in Östersund, I myself asked why they had the travel policy they had at the time and advised against using the plane even though they wanted more money from the state for the regional airport. Then they went home, did the homework, and changed it. I think that is positive. We have also increased the support to the regional airports by 400 percent.

More people should, however, do this. The only sure way forward is that we now have a government that takes the flight seriously and strengthens it. We do not know what the alternative would be. We do not know that either after this debate today.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

The speech at riksdagen.se, in Swedish (opens in a new tab)