Road safety

Ann-Sofie Lifvenhage (M)

Mr. Speaker! I want to begin by sending my warmest thoughts to the relatives who have lost their loved ones in the tragic train accident in Örebro late yesterday evening. What has happened shows how important the road safety work is that we are debating today.

The last time we addressed the issue in the chamber was in June last year. At that time, I began by sharing my start in life when it came to traffic etiquette. I saw the Accident on TV and was terrified that this unfortunate type would get a hold of me.

Well, just a year ago, I could not have imagined in my wildest dreams that these nightmares would come back. The misfortune was just a fictional figure. No matter how real he seemed to my six-year-old self, he was still just fictional.

Now the nightmares are real. We have received a working hours agreement that totally destroys Swedish rescue services. Those everyday heroes in our elongated country who have chosen to be the ones who are first on the scene when an accident occurs, those whom I so immensely want to see train and continue to burn for the mission to help and rescue, will on a national scale no longer be our heroes because SKR, Sobona and Kommunal have signed a working hours agreement, certainly in the very best of intentions, which now has catastrophic consequences all over the country.

This is an agreement that locks in all forms of flexibility and reduces the possibility of recovery between shifts, which previously made the heroes find attractiveness even in one of the most difficult and most demanding of jobs: to be deployed in life's most difficult situations. Now the heroes are seeking new jobs. Our civil defense risks being disrupted without us being in either crisis or war.

Mr. Speaker! Today we are debating road safety. When an accident occurs despite all our efforts, we want nothing more than for emergency services to arrive to the rescue. The agreement that has now been concluded risks paralyzing Sweden and causes about eighty rescue service associations across the country to seek exemptions from their own agreement in order to be able to continue performing the job. In that case, action, punishment, and improvement are required.

This is how the Minister for Civil Defence, Carl-Oskar Bohlin, expressed himself when he recently spoke to the industry during the 112-days:

I see and hear the concern that exists in several places across the country. The need for a well-functioning rescue service is inescapable. This also applies to the possibility of carrying out the training and exercises required to maintain capability. The risk of a skills shortage at the local level is alarming, to say the least, and I know that a large number of exemption applications have been submitted.

The Swedish model is unique, with a strong autonomy for the parties in the labor market. One can have different opinions about that, but we are probably all in agreement that it is a model that we want to try to safeguard and preserve. It does, however, place high demands on the parties to jointly take responsibility so that necessary operations function across the entire spectrum of threats. An agreement that does not meet the requirements that the new and serious global situation entails risks endangering Sweden's security.

Therefore, I assume that the parties, in light of this, now that the new agreement has entered into force, also evaluate the agreement.

That is as far as Carl-Oskar Bohlin.

It is high time to return to the negotiating table before we lose Sweden's true everyday heroes. These are everyday heroes like Marcus Aronsson, who works in Borås at Södra Älvsborgs räddningstjänstförbund. There, the rescue service is the first on the scene and secures the accident site with their vehicles so that they and the ambulance can work safely. Their knowledge and technology ensure that people can be cut free and rescued to be taken to the hospital quickly.

Or like Christer Sjögren, who together with his colleagues at Sörmlandskustens räddningstjänst in my home county responds and closes the road so that the accident site does not get worse or so that the police can do their job with breathalyzers and hear witnesses. They also arrange alternating traffic so that traffic does not need to be closed longer than necessary and are therefore of great help in reducing social disruption.

Mr. Speaker! On-site, I hear testimonies about how the recovery with the new agreement has become so poor that they are afraid of not being able to cope and of ending up in situations at home that can no longer be pieced together, not even with a large portion of will. Stephanie Pizzignacco, a fantastic female role model in the fire service, has already left her position. She and her family could not make everyday life work with two adults in the emergency services and small children at home. All of this is due to an agreement that no one in the industry has asked for, that no one wants, which causes us to lose competence and which is also more expensive than before. This is nothing other than pure madness.

Now it is urgent to change, just as the country's civil defense minister pointed out, before we in upcoming traffic safety statistics read about more personal tragedies due to deficiencies in support when the accident has occurred. That responsibility rests heavily on the parties in the labor market - for a safe and secure Sweden.

To SKR and Kommunal I want to say: We trust that you take your responsibility. Back to the negotiating table! Listen to the professionals so that the blue-light heroes who are there for us can feel that we are there for them!

Mr. Speaker! Let us leave the nightmare for a moment and move on. I welcome the bill on a probationary period for AM driving license eligibility, which we are addressing in today's report. A one-year probationary period for the driving license is yet another safety measure and a clear indication of the importance of taking responsibility once one sets out into traffic to continue practicing on one's own and become a skilled driver.

Traffic is a large part of everyday life, but it also involves one of the greatest risks we face every day. Sweden is a pioneer when it comes to road safety. The Zero Vision clearly states that no one should be killed or seriously injured in traffic. Still, we have a way to go.

Approximately one-third of those who end their lives in traffic do so by choice, so-called suicide. This is a serious societal problem where we all, as fellow human beings, have the opportunity to make a contribution. However dark it may feel, there is always hope. My appeal is to be such a fellow human being who makes that extra call, who reaches out a hand to someone who is having a hard time and dares to say that it is okay not to feel tip-top here and now, that it actually can get better and that you are there.

Mental health is a sub-explanation for why we are not reaching the zero vision. To reach the goals, we must work broadly, with both traffic safety measures and preventing mental ill-health.

Mr. Speaker! Road safety is about creating a culture where safety is prioritized by everyone and where our infrastructure and, for example, road maintenance live up to its name. The National Audit Office recently directed scathing criticism in a report and pointed out that more people have died in traffic in recent years due to a lack of measures.

Life is fragile. We are now doing everything to transition and prioritize road maintenance, safer infrastructure investments, and technology that can contribute to preventing accidents. Modern systems for speed limits in the car, median barriers that create safe, meeting-free lanes, warning systems for fatigue, and autonomous driving are just a few examples of measures and innovations that can make our roads safer.

Together we can make a real difference. By reaching out a hand or having a conversation, by educating and raising awareness, and by investing in maintenance and safety technology, we can reduce the number of traffic accidents and save lives.

With that said, I would like to vote in favor of the government bill and the committee's proposal.

(Applause)

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! In the report on Road Safety, 120 motions from the general motion period are addressed. Furthermore, the government's bill on the probationary period for the AM driving license, which concerns A-tractors, is addressed.

We Social Democrats have three reservations, which we stand behind. But I move for approval only to reservation 10 regarding traffic safety during roadworks and rescue operations.

Road safety is about how we plan, invest in, and maintain infrastructure and transport systems. That the different modes of transport are used in the best way, for example that more goods are shifted from road to rail in order to thereby reduce the number of trucks on the roads, as well as fair conditions for those who work in the transport industry, are also road safety issues.

The number of those killed and seriously injured in traffic has increased since 2020. In that context, Mr. Speaker, I would like to mention the extremely tragic accident in Örebro yesterday where three people died. It clearly shows the importance of us having a continued ambitious road safety work, in order to prevent death and serious injury.

The new interim target, which the government decided on in 2020, means that the number of fatalities resulting from traffic accidents across all modes of transport shall be halved by 2030. The number of seriously injured within each mode of transport shall decrease by 25 percent.

In order for us to reach the 2030 goals that the number of killed and injured should decrease, a continued systematic and preventive work is required regarding vehicles, infrastructure and surveillance. It is also about separation of traffic, use of seat belts, speed and sobriety.

For those for whom the road is a workplace, increased traffic safety is particularly important. No one should have to die or be injured in their work, which in this case often involves saving others' lives or arriving to provide assistance.

In that context, I still want to point out that what Ann-Sofie Lifvenhage raised regarding working time agreements and competence within the blue-light services is an important issue for road safety, but an issue that the parties must solve, and it must take place within the Swedish model.

The action plan for improved safety at work on the road, which applies until 2025 and was initiated by the previous government, needs to be completed but also revised moving forward.

Mr. Speaker! Climate change affects our roads and railways through increased risk of erosion, flooding, collapses, and landslides. The alternating cold and mild weather affects the roads when water gets into cracks where it freezes and thaws alternately. This means that the costs for road maintenance increase, and it adds to the large maintenance debt that already exists. The significance of climate change for road maintenance is therefore important to include in the continued work. Unfortunately, however, there are parts of the Riksdag that completely ignore climate threats and climate change.

On Wednesday, January 3, approximately 1,000 vehicles became stuck on the E22 in Skåne. Many were stuck in their cars for a full day. That no one suffered more serious injuries must be seen as pure luck. How can it go so wrong? Even though warnings were issued for severe weather, it is not as simple as that the accident was due to the weather. Blowing snow in Skåne is nothing new.

Citizens sat for hours waiting to be deployed. An inability to take initiative and non-existent coordination created a very serious situation. If Sweden's preparedness and coordination are not better than this in peacetime, how will we manage a larger crisis or war?

The snow chaos in Skåne occurred at the beginning of the year. With much of the winter remaining, we Social Democrats requested that the Minister for Infrastructure, who is ultimately responsible, should come to the committee. It is remarkable that the parties from the SD-led government refused to accommodate this.

Mr. Speaker! A-traktors are a phenomenon unique to Sweden. They give young people living outside the metropolitan areas a sense of freedom. It is a way to socialize and to not be dependent on parents providing transport or on public transport that does not always exist or cannot meet the needs of young people.

The number of A-tractors has increased significantly in recent years, and with it, the number of accidents has also increased. There is a consensus across party lines regarding increased road safety and A-tractors. It concerns requirements for seat belts, number of passengers, and winter tires, as well as the proposal in the bill we have to take a position on: to introduce a probationary period for new driving license holders with the AM qualification.

There is also a consensus regarding education and the need for a review to stop the tampering of A-traktors. It is very serious that the Swedish Vehicle Testing Foundation reports that seven out of eight A-traktors inspected exhibit deficiencies and that half have inaccuracies that require follow-up inspection. It is therefore important with continued safety focus and clear requirements when it comes to A-traktors, but it is also important that the mobility of young people is not worsened.

Yesterday, the European Parliament voted on new requirements for A-tractors. It concerns raising the age limit from 15 to 16 years as well as that the AM-qualification shall be replaced by a B1 driving license, which can in principle be equated with a standard B driving license. This would mean significantly higher costs for the young and their parents. It would dramatically change and worsen the young people's opportunities for freedom and independence and hit the youth in rural areas particularly hard.

It is important that the government takes responsibility for clearly pushing forward the issue of age limits for Sweden's young people. We Social Democrats will push the issue through the ongoing process, because judging by the discussions here in the chamber, no one wants to make things worse for the young people in the countryside. What one could wish for, or perhaps had requested, is that the government and the Sverigedemokraterna had pushed the issue more clearly and earlier before it came to a vote in the EU Parliament yesterday.

(Applause)

In this speech, Kadir Kasirga (S) agreed.

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

Thomas Morell (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Member Ödebrink asked how it could have gone so wrong on the E22. At that point, I felt prompted to answer.

What happened on the E22 was by no means news. One could say that what occurred was a real stroke of luck, for what happened beyond the catastrophe down there? Well, the media shone a light on how poorly the maintenance of winter roads is functioning.

For several years, I have held a discussion here in the chamber with the former Minister for Infrastructure about how poorly Trafikverket manages the maintenance of winter roads. It comes to a standstill as soon as there is a little snow. It becomes ice-slick. Cars go off the road. Accidents occur. The answer I received then was that there was a modern and well-functioning maintenance of winter roads. Modern it is, but it definitely does not function.

What we saw on the E22 is a result of the previous government's way of running and managing Trafikverket. It is a direct consequence of not addressing the concerns that existed. They increased the number of employees by 48 percent during the eight years, but the maintenance of the roads only became worse.

It has now gone so far that both trucking companies and drivers across the country have said that they will not drive if things do not improve. They risk neither drivers nor vehicles on these roads. It is a result of a poorly managed agency, which is responsible for managing the maintenance of the roads. That responsibility rests heavily on the previous government.

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! I recognize Thomas Morell's rhetoric and argumentation. We have heard it several times in the committee but also in this chamber. I think Morell is making it a bit easy for himself.

It works very differently around the country. I have lived by a country road, or rather a motorway, for 30 years and seen that the winter road maintenance has deteriorated, but that the lack of maintenance is solely due to the previous government is an argument that reasonably should have an expiration date. Now, the SD-led government has almost ruled for two years. Perhaps it would be appropriate to talk about what one wants to do instead. What do your proposals look like?

This is not just about Trafikverket, but actually about that no one took initiative and that there was no coordination. I think, therefore, that Morell is making it a bit easy for himself, but it remains to be seen what happens. It is up to the other government base to prove it now.

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

Thomas Morell (SD)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the member for the questions. I have not lived by any real highway, only a small gravel road that there wasn't much of. On the other hand, I have sat on a highway for quite a few miles. I belong to the group that can call themselves professional drivers. I have followed the development through the years and seen how bad the situation is and how bad it has become. I have also worked for twelve years in the traffic police and been out and seen the consequences of poorly maintained winter roads. I have sat in the ditch and taken care of people who have experienced the worst moment of their lives. I know what it is about.

I have been extremely critical of the previous government. The former Minister for Infrastructure can attest to that. Do not be deceived by the fact that I have fallen silent, because I have not – neither here in the chamber nor anywhere else. Ödebrink asked for proposals on what we want to do. We want to review Trafikverket's organization, and it must happen in the near future, because this cannot continue.

We are talking right now about the maintenance of winter roads, but it is enough to stand on a platform and see if the train runs on time - if any train even comes at all. There are concerns regardless of whether one intends to choose road or railway. The organization must be reviewed, because it does not work. You had that chance for eight years. You did not take it. But I will do what I can to make that change happen.

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! If one constantly points at Trafikverket and says that it is an incompetent agency, I think that Thomas Morell and the government base have every opportunity in the world to straighten up and change it. It needs to be done here and now to cope with what is happening today.

We Social Democrats also want to conduct a review, but the Sweden Democrats have not been prepared to support that proposal. Pointing to an incompetent authority can be done if one only wants to paint a picture of the problems and is not always so solution-oriented. It is about also being able to present solutions and say what one wants moving forward.

I think there are other nuances that are important to include in this context. How has marketization affected how money is used and ensuring that as much as possible is extracted? In procurements, there are few contractors today who submit bids. This disadvantages small and medium-sized actors.

There is a competence in the organization that has disappeared. There is a lack of resources and machines. It is a development that has occurred over time, regardless of how the governments have looked, since the organization underwent a change. I think it is important to include that.

A small tip for Thomas Morell is to try to be more solution-oriented moving forward regarding these issues.

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Carina Ödebrink, for a good speech! I do, however, have a small reflection. In substance, I believe that most of us here in the chamber actually share the view that A-traktors are a gigantic freedom reform. They provide mobility and allow young people, in a quite safe way, with a shell around them, to be in the countryside in traffic and get to school and football practice, maybe even date someone, gather in one place or another and play good music and have a good time. It is also part of a Swedish cultural heritage, I would say.

When I was younger, there were a few of us who thought it was cool to head off on the moped to meet up and hang out. But with the regulatory changes that occurred, the A-license became even more popular than it was when I was young.

Now there is also the EU-moped, which is actually a significantly more dangerous vehicle. It is a plastic shell that is allowed to drive faster than a metal shell. There is much to consider there.

It is just one thing I react to, Mr. Speaker. Carina Ödebrink and I agree on what she said in her speech. What is it then that makes it so that one has a policy in this chamber and another in the EU Parliament? The Social Democrats actually chose to vote yes to moving the age from 15 to 16. Here, Mr. Speaker, I want to be clear. I think the government should have been clearer. I know that we at Tidösidan will push hard when moving to the next step in the processes to defend the Swedish cultural heritage and the A-tractor. But why does S conduct two forms of politics - one here and one in Brussels?

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank you for the question. I can assure Magnus Jacobsson that we are pursuing one and the same policy when it comes to the issue of the A-traktor. I think it is important to emphasize that there is a broad consensus in how we view safety and how we view the A-traktor as an important tool for freedom for our young people.

The Social Democrats in Brussels voted for the proposal that we should maintain the age limit of 15 years. When the final vote was then taken, we chose to vote on the whole to then take the issue further in the ongoing work. That is the answer to Magnus Jacobsson's question.

I can repeat what I said earlier in my speech: We have had this issue up in the Transport Committee on several occasions. I would have liked to have seen the government be even clearer and take this issue even more seriously, so that we could have achieved a different outcome at yesterday's vote. Now that did not happen.

The question goes back to Magnus Jacobsson and the government parties. Now it is up to them to prove it, so that we can solve this! I think we can help each other. But it is an important issue for the government to drive.

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! How we vote in our own group meetings or in our own party groups in Brussels is probably difficult for all of us to provide evidence for in any way. I naturally have respect for what is said. I also believe in what is said. But it is a bit difficult to provide evidence for.

What is clear, however, is how people have voted in the chamber - here or in Brussels. It is a fact that the Social Democrats voted for the increase that is now proposed, while among others my party did not.

Mr. Speaker! I truly hope that we will reach a consensus, not only in Sweden but above all in Brussels. I truly hope that we together – the government parties, the Tidö partners, and the opposition – will work to ensure that our Swedish youth can continue to travel safely and securely in a metal shell instead of a plastic shell.

Mr. Speaker! I am grateful if there is a consensus, but it should then also be present in Brussels.

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is, of course, natural to want to describe reality in a way that best serves one's own interests. Magnus Jacobsson does so in his own way. I have explained the Social Democratic starting point.

There is a consensus that we need to work together to resolve this issue. I do not see that either the A-tractor issue or our young people would benefit from us standing here in the chamber or in other contexts and bickering with each other over who said what and who said that. There has been strong support for us to retain the age limit when it comes to A-tractors. We also see that we need to strengthen the opportunities for and the requirements on education. I think we should take a firm stand on that, and it applies to both the government's parties and the other parties. But the government is ultimately responsible for driving this issue. That is where the ball lies today.

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

Thomas Morell (SD)

Mr. Speaker! We stand by all our reservations, but I move for approval only of reservation 6.

To begin with, I want to send a thought to the families affected by the serious accident on the railway at Örebro södra yesterday. I understand what families, friends and witnesses are going through. I also empathize with the driver who was operating the train and was affected by this. A driver in that situation has not much else to do than to honk and brake and is actually passive otherwise. It was an incredibly tragic event that affects very many people. It is exactly so when it comes to traffic safety. Very many people are affected when an accident occurs. Most of us probably have some family member, close relative or friend who has been involved in a serious accident in traffic. It is incredibly difficult for those who are affected.

What is road safety then? Is it to install automatic speed cameras along our roads, or is it significantly more complicated than that? For me, who has devoted nearly all of my adult life to road safety, this question is important. For the sake of road safety, it is also important that the roads are maintained both in summer and winter.

Mr. Speaker! One of the worst work weeks I have experienced occurred about 20 years ago. In one week, seven people died in traffic accidents in Skaraborg alone. I was involved in investigating the cause of all of these accidents. One is humbled by such a difficult task, and one is moved in a way that cannot be described with words. Each one of these victims of traffic fatalities has a large circle of people around them – parents, children, siblings, relatives, and friends. Every death in traffic affects many, not least those who act at the scene of the accident and in the investigation that follows.

Road safety is important and something that concerns and affects us all. Traffic safety cameras are far from the solution. It requires the presence of traffic police. They detect impaired drivers, illegal maneuvers, and so on - serious crimes that a camera completely overlooks.

Mr. Speaker! The country's professional drivers have an important message for us politicians: The maintenance of our winter roads is not working. They know, because they travel on the roads daily, every day of the year. They literally put their lives at risk so that our society can function.

Thank goodness, one can actually say, we got the situation on the E22 earlier this winter. It made the media wake up and describe how fabulously poorly the maintenance of the winter roads works. The authority responsible for the operation and maintenance of our roads has, over the last 20 years, consistently phased out the competence to conduct a functioning maintenance of our winter roads.

In several parliamentary debates with the former Minister for Infrastructure, I received the answer that Trafikverket had a modern and efficient way to maintain our winter roads. It is possible that it is modern, but it does not work. One can ask any professional driver, and the answer is clear: The maintenance is a catastrophe.

Mr. Speaker! What are the consequences if trucking companies and their drivers park the vehicles during parts of the winter half-year? Our industry is dependent on functioning transport, public transport, food production, and healthcare. We need food on the table and clothes on our bodies. In short, the professional drivers' work efforts make our society function. Is it then not a reasonable requirement that the professional drivers can perform their jobs in a traffic environment that functions as well in winter as in summer? The road maintenance is severely neglected, and the appropriations need to be increased to stop the decay in the Swedish road network.

Mr. Speaker! At the end of December last year, the National Audit Office released an audit report that was extremely critical of the previous government's and the Transport Administration's actions in infrastructure planning. Let me quote two sentences that shed light on the problem: "In a previous audit, the National Audit Office has noted that the Transport Administration's cost control within investment activities has deficiencies." Furthermore: "In practice, this means, for example, that more lives could have been saved in traffic and that many more citizens could have received better transport provision at the same cost." The audit report is particularly worth reading. It clearly shows how one should not plan infrastructure. But the previous government is history. Now we must focus on the Transport Administration, and it is certainly time to review this colossal agency.

Mr. Speaker! Alcohol and drugs are an increasing problem in traffic. We know that the risks increase significantly with impaired drivers, and the statistics also show that alcohol and drugs are present in far too many accidents. Sverigedemokraterna argues that drug and alcohol checks must be increased significantly. Alcohol-impaired and drug-impaired drivers must be removed from our roads.

Mr. Speaker! Work performed on or near a road is associated with great risks because many motorists do not respect signs and warning lights to a desirable extent. Every year, several people are killed or injured when they perform work on or near a road. So-called TMA vehicles are used as protection during various works on the road. You have surely seen these vehicles with their large crash cushions, flashing lights, and warning signs. These vehicles have the task of, with their presence and equipment, alerting other road users to an ongoing work. Despite both signs and warning lights, these TMA vehicles are struck, and these collisions are increasing in frequency. The situation is not acceptable, and I often speak with people who experience insecurity when they work on the road.

This development must be reversed, and for us Sverigedemokrater, it is a priority issue. One must be able to go to one's work out on the road and feel safe. This applies to both road workers and tow truck operators as well as emergency services, ambulance drivers, and police officers. They stand right in the middle of the traffic. There must be a respect for the signs and warning systems that exist so that they can perform their work in a safe manner. Their presence in the traffic is supposed to help us others to get through safely and securely.

Mr. Speaker! Road safety concerns everyone, and we in the Swedish Parliament have the tools to increase safety on Sweden's roads. Let us jointly increase the safety of the country's motorists.

(Applause)

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! For us Social Democrats, infrastructure, transport systems and climate issues are incredibly important, and road safety as part of our work in the Transport Committee is about both transitioning and creating conditions for safe freight and passenger transport. Therefore, we had a national plan that delivered resources to be able to meet the needs we see.

But I believe that both Thomas Morell and I can agree that the needs are much greater, so now it is up to the SD-led government to meet the needs that exist. Of course, one must prioritize; that is always the case. But when the Social Democratic group travels around the country, we see that there are very large needs when it comes to maintenance, investments, and continued investments in railways and traffic safety.

I am sorry, but I cannot fulfill this request because you have not provided the Swedish text from the Riksdag for me to translate. Please provide the text you would like me to translate.

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

Thomas Morell (SD)

Mr. Speaker! Without infrastructure, nothing else works. If we do not have an infrastructure that can meet the needs we have throughout the country, both in cities and in rural areas, nothing else will work either. The maintenance of our roads has become increasingly worse over the years, and the report I referred to is very critical of how the previous government managed this and that they did not have control over the costs. It is a concern if money flows without one getting value for it. Now we have a huge task ahead of us to rectify this, and then we must look at Trafikverket's organization and cost control.

In eleven reports, I believe, the Swedish National Audit Office has criticized the lack of control over this activity. The previous government was responsible for the agency, but now we have taken over that responsibility and are trying to organize the activity to get more bang for the buck and get the roads to work both summer and winter. It is also about getting a functioning train traffic, because now it stands still regardless of when one is traveling. This has been the great concern, and it creates a situation where we do not manage the most fundamental in our society. This we must change, and now we have the toolbox and shall see to it that there is a change.

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

Carina Ödebrink (S)

Mr. Speaker! I note that Thomas Morell does not at all address what I asked for, namely the Sweden Democrats' view on climate change and what needs to be done regarding them so that the roads become even worse. But it is perhaps not so strange with a party that largely denies climate change.

Let me also remind Thomas Morell that the Social Democratic government tasked Trafikverket and Transportstyrelsen with tightening cost control. This work needs to be intensified, because we must, of course, get the most possible out of the tax money we invest. The Social Democratic government did, however, take measures to address the increased costs.

Mr. Speaker! An incompetent Transport Administration and an incompetent government is Thomas Morell's answer to why things look the way they do. But he will probably have to rewrite his speech soon, because it no longer holds up. But what does Thomas Morell think the marketization, the outsourcing, and the fragmentation of important public services have had for significance for how things look today?

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

Thomas Morell (SD)

Mr. Speaker! We begin with the climate, because that was the fundamental question. What we see out on our roads is said to be affected by the climate, but let us look at how the maintenance is performed. One does not remove the problem of water penetration in the road body itself, and then it freezes apart when it gets cold. It is completely natural because ice expands. It would be desirable if, instead, one laid a top layer that functions as a roof so that one does not get these enormous damages in the roadway. Instead, they skimp and drive around with one of those snowplows – you have surely seen such – and spray a little tar and gravel on top, and a week later, one has the same situation again. It has nothing to do with the climate.

If, on the other hand, we get a road standard that makes traffic function better, it will affect all emissions positively, because one does not need to keep accelerating and braking all the time and take into account all the potholes that have appeared in the road.

Yes, Trafikverket is incompetent. The competence one had previously has been lost. There were very many officials who had immense knowledge both on the road side and on the railway side. Today, one buys consultancy services for this. No wonder it looks the way it does!

Whether governments are competent or not, I let the voters decide. That is best, in fact. But that it did not work with the previous government, Ödebrink does not need to listen to me to know. Please read the report from Riksrevisionen, for it provides the answer to that question.

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

Helena Gellerman (L)

Mr. Speaker! Road safety work is very close to my heart after twelve years of research in road safety.

For society to function, we need to be able to travel safely from home to work and school, or when we visit relatives and friends or go on holiday. The vehicles must be safe, the roads must have a good standard, the railway crossings must function, and places where one switches from, for example, car to train or public transport must be well-thought-out for the travelers.

Sweden has for a long time conducted successful road safety work and is the country with the lowest number of deaths per inhabitant in traffic in the entire world. Many Swedish inventions have contributed to this, not least the seat belt, which has saved many lives.

Sweden created the zero vision, which many countries have adopted. It is a mental railing to hold onto in order to continue, step by step, to reduce the number of those killed and seriously injured in traffic. We have researched and developed systems for what is required so that no one should die or be seriously injured in traffic, with a focus on the human, the vehicle, and the traffic environment.

Unfortunately, the number of road fatalities has reached a plateau. Since 2019, it has remained between 204 and 232, and 232 is unfortunately last year's level. What do we then need to do to approach the zero vision?

Mr. Speaker! Analyses show that the most important causes of accidents are, firstly, excessive speed, secondly, alcohol and other drugs, and thirdly, fatigue and inattention. The human factor actually lies behind over 90 percent of all accidents.

High speed is simultaneously linked to the road's design and condition. We have seen how Trafikverket, due to insufficient funds for maintenance, has lowered the speed on certain road sections around the country because the road does not have an acceptable standard. So we cannot continue. We must have a road standard that allows people to get to work in a reasonable time.

Road safety should not depend on where you live in the country. We need to invest money in maintaining our roads, not least in the countryside. It is also fortunately the measure that has the greatest socio-economic benefit. Road markings, for example, have a decisive impact on road safety, regardless of whether it is the human eye or the car's camera that is to detect the markings. One must know that one is staying on their side of the road. The Liberals have pushed for a review of the standard of road markings in our country.

We all know that the risk of accidents increases in proportion to a higher speed of the vehicle. Even greenhouse gas emissions and noise are linked to the speed. In addition to personal suffering, the environment is degraded, and society's costs increase.

For safer roads, we Liberals want that requirements for sustainable speeds be set in public procurement of transport services, meaning that the supplier's vehicles maintain the speed. This would have a dampening effect on the average speed on our roads and radically reduce emissions.

Monitoring and control on our roads plays an important role for regulatory compliance. The Liberals want to see more traffic police dedicated to the important traffic control work that takes place on the road. We have many vehicles on our Swedish roads, not least foreign ones, that would not pass a technical inspection. We therefore need significantly more controls of vehicles and of whether the rules for speed, use of alcohol and other drugs as well as driving and rest times are respected. The work with alcohol bombs in our ports is also an important piece of the puzzle.

Mr. Speaker! If we are truly to address the human factor behind 90 percent of the accidents – for excessive speed, alcohol and other drugs, as well as fatigue and inattention – we need to replace the human driver with self-driving vehicles. We Liberals are technology optimists. Development is moving forward, and step by step, the systems are being introduced into the vehicles. Fully self-driving cars, however, are still some time away.

To facilitate development, we need to remove obstacles to testing the technology in a safe way, with larger tests in real environments for specific purposes. Sweden has the conditions to become a pioneering country for self-driving vehicles and thus utilize the great social benefit that the technology allows, not least when it comes to traffic safety and transport in rural areas.

The Liberals believe in the possibilities of technology for increased road safety. More and more cars are connected and can share their data to, for example, identify ice patches or other cars in obscured visibility. The potential of the information in today's vehicles could be utilized significantly better, and rules that hinder development need to be reviewed.

The share of unprotected road users in fatal accidents is a worrying trend, not least the share of cyclists and pedestrians. Of 232 deceased in 2023, 93 were unprotected road users, i.e., a full 40 percent. The Liberals want to see a review of cyclists' traffic environments and powerful measures to curb this trend.

Here, the availability of data again plays an important role in order for research and development based on accident data to be facilitated, naturally with regard to personal privacy. The rules for access to Trafikverket's system for traffic accidents, Strada, were changed a few years ago for privacy reasons. The review was good, but the access to data has been throttled to the extent that important traffic safety work cannot be performed. This means that traffic safety, not least for unprotected road users such as motorcyclists, risks being neglected. The Liberals therefore want to investigate how unwanted effects can be addressed.

An important part of the work on road safety is access to solid driving education. We need to reach the illegal driving schools and improve the proportion that pass the theory and driving tests – otherwise, we risk having an increased number of accidents in five to ten years due to poorly trained drivers.

Mr. Speaker! Moped cars and A-tractors have increased the freedom of movement for young people. Young people are more protected in a moped car or an A-tractor than on a moped. As a parent, one therefore thinks that it is a better alternative.

We liberals are positive about new technology and increased mobility, but it must not lead to increased personal injuries. We see a worrying trend when it comes to moped cars but perhaps above all when it comes to A-tractors.

On July 15, 2020, the rules were changed so that the speed of A-tractors can be regulated digitally. The number of heavier vehicles registered as A-tractors has increased since then and, even worse, so have the traffic accidents. Currently, twelve hours of training is required, and the driving practice can be done on a two-wheeled moped. Some rule changes have been implemented by the government, such as seat belt requirements, one person per seat, and requirements for winter tires. According to VTI's report from November 2023, however, this is not sufficient to improve the accident statistics.

Yesterday, the European Parliament voted on the new driving license directive, which contains changes for A-tractors. The long-awaited increase of the speed to 45 kilometers per hour was passed together with a new driving license, B1, which requires a driving test, an age limit of 16 years, and a weight limit for the vehicle of 2,500 kilos.

It is important to say that these are the same requirements that all parties in the Riksdag stood behind in the Committee on Transport and Infrastructure and also in the EU Committee in November 2023. All parties here in the Riksdag thus supported exactly the requirements that were voted through in the European Parliament and which were the Swedish position in the Council of Ministers in December last year.

Now a so-called trilogue between the Council of Ministers, the European Parliament and the Commission awaits before it is finished. With these new rules, I hope that young people will get increased freedom and be able to drive at higher speeds, but that this can hopefully occur with increased road safety.

Mr. Speaker! We can all be affected by illnesses that can affect our ability to drive. Therefore, it is important that there is a uniform way to test whether an illness or impaired vision actually affects the driving ability itself. The Liberals therefore want that traffic medical assessments are reviewed so that they are carried out in the same way throughout the country.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I want to bring up the announcement that the Liberals initiated three years ago. It concerns those people who test their vision and are found to have visual defects. Their driver's licenses are revoked immediately, which means they do not get a fair chance to show whether their driving ability is affected by the visual defect. This is not reasonable. It affects 1,000 people every year, but research shows that approximately half of them could retain their driver's license because their driving ability is not affected. VTI has produced a report, and the government is now reviewing the issue.

Finally, road safety is an area that Sweden has every reason to be proud of, while at the same time much work remains for us to reach the zero vision.

I therefore move for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision and rejection of all motions.

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

Anders Ådahl (C)

Mr. Speaker! When I was 18 years, one month and three days old, I got my driver's license for a car. I came home from the driving test to mom and dad, giddy in my mind and with butterflies in my stomach. The license was first a paper certificate but then a real driver's license.

In the evening, I borrowed my parents' Volvo 740, and I got behind the wheel and drove off on road 180 down to central Borås. What freedom! It is a moment that is incredibly strong and firmly anchored in my memory. I even remember scents from that evening.

I did not live in the countryside but grew up in a row house area. I could cycle and take public transport when I was going to meet friends, play football or hang out at the youth center, but the feeling of freedom when I got my driver's license cannot be much different than the freedom that 15-year-olds who today drive A-tractors experience.

Mr. Speaker! The European Parliament has this week voted for a proposal to raise the age limit for driving an A-tractor from 15 to 16 years. The proposal is part of a larger overhaul of the directives for driving license rules in the union. The proposal means that a B1 driving license, with an age limit of 16 years, shall be required to drive an A-tractor. If the proposal becomes law, it will mean that the speed limit for A-tractors, which is currently 30 kilometers per hour, will be raised to 45 kilometers per hour. This is admittedly good, but the age increase is wrong.

Let me be very clear here regarding the age limit: Raising the age limit for A-traktors is a very significant restriction of freedom for young people, especially in rural areas. If we want to protect the countryside and ensure that all of Sweden is attractive to grow up in and live in, we must defend the freedom for a young person to be able to move around, meet friends, travel from one village to the next, participate in leisure activities, and so on.

I know that the EU Commission has long been skeptical of Sweden allowing young people to drive A-tractors from the age of 15. I also know that several Swedish parliamentarians in the EU tried to achieve changes before the vote in parliament. I also know that there is a fairly broad consensus among the parties in the Riksdag to stand up for the Swedish model with A-tractors.

I know this, but unfortunately the bitter truth is that the Swedish government backed down in the ministerial council negotiations and did not have the strength to drive this issue with the force that would have been required to safeguard our Swedish rules for A-traktor.

What happened this week when the European Parliament held its vote was somewhat of a last chance to prevent the raising of the age limit. But it is not too late yet. My appeal to the government parties and the Sverigedemokraterna is to show heart and fighting spirit for the Swedish countryside and our youth there. Do not give up, but ensure that the proposal is changed in the negotiations that are now beginning! We in Centerpartiet stand up for the Swedish countryside, but now more need to do so.

Mr. Speaker! It is naturally not only in the EU that the question of A-tractors must be addressed, but also in Sweden's Riksdag. We in the Center Party have submitted a motion regarding A-tractors and their regulations and safety, which I hope can win support in the chamber.

The debate on A-tractors has been extensive. Conflicts of objectives regarding accident risks and safety are weighed against freedom and joy. The Center Party's direction is to resolve the conflict of objectives so that, not least for youth in the countryside, they can have both freedom and joy while road safety is good.

In 2020, the technical requirements for converting a car into an A-tractor were simplified. This change was implemented, among other reasons, so that it would be possible to also convert automatic transmission cars into A-tractors. Since the change, the number of A-tractors has increased, and the interest is great.

We mean that the regulations for A-tractors should be reviewed further to increase safety but also to open up the possibility of making it permissible to drive modern A-tractors faster than is the case today. We also want to allow a back seat and thus a maximum of four belted passengers per vehicle. A first step in this direction would be to initiate a review to see how modern A-tractors can be allowed to travel faster than is permitted today. This would be a development that is analogous to the maximum speed for EU mopeds.

Parallelly, we mean, measures are needed to ensure safety. A prerequisite for increasing the speed is that A-tractors become safe to operate, both for those who are in the A-tractors and for those who are affected in the event of a collision. A review would therefore consider both maximum speed and safety.

Furthermore, a conversion of engines should be facilitated so that A-tractors can be powered by biofuels or electricity. Another measure is that the driving license training can be lengthened. The requirements for a driving license for A-tractor should include driving practice in an A-tractor, all in order to simultaneously increase both freedom and safety.

I move that the Riksdag supports the Swedish countryside by approving reservation 15.

Mr. Speaker! The Centre Party has, during the spring, launched something we call Sverigelyftet. By Sverigelyftet, we mean that for traffic safety and to get the whole country to function, we must achieve a functioning infrastructure. We want to see investments in the maintenance of roads, resumption of work on main lines, and necessary new railway investments for Sweden's industry - and that the government appoints an infrastructure commission.

Sweden's transport infrastructure needs to be upgraded, and it is urgent. A severely neglected maintenance of Swedish roads and railways causes delays, cancelled journeys, and accidents throughout our long country. For every day that passes, the maintenance debt grows larger, and the risk of accidents increases. It affects Swedish growth and competitiveness. Job opportunities and tax revenues are lost. It affects people who have to plan their lives according to the weather report or simply choose to opt out of the train in favor of a car or flight. We cannot have that.

Today's situation cannot continue. The Swedish people must once again be able to book a train journey without a lump in their stomach. Swedish roads must be passable, regardless of where one lives in the country.

It is absolutely crucial that we maintain the infrastructure that already exists. But we must also, in our welfare state, have sufficient resources to expand roads and railways for the future. We cannot only choose maintenance; we must also choose investments.

Train travel is estimated to increase by over 50 percent by 2040 and car travel by around 25 percent, and road transport is expected to continue to account for a completely dominant part of personal travel. Today's rail and road networks cannot handle this in a safe, reliable, and sustainable way. Therefore, we propose that the maintenance debt be addressed starting now to be completely resolved by 2035 at the latest.

We want Sverigelyftet to be financed by shifting from surplus targets in the state's finances to a balance target, but only on the condition that the money is used for investments that are fiscally favorable for Sweden in the short or long term.

Mr. Speaker! Both the business community and municipalities and regions need long-term thinking in the decisions that are made. The government's patchwork approach regarding the main railway lines is a good example of how Sweden's infrastructure policy cannot look moving forward. There must be political stability in decisions that span many parliamentary terms. Now, infrastructure policy is almost a wrecked political area. Details and trivial matters obscure the view of the large and long-term. Political positioning and the agendas of lobby organizations govern the political decisions. That is not how we are to manage Sweden's lifeblood - our infrastructure.

Mr. Speaker! In order to achieve political stability in infrastructure policy, we therefore propose that an infrastructure commission be appointed, whose purpose is to work long-term and with a holistic perspective. We in the political landscape, broadly across the parties in the Riksdag, have the task of regaining confidence in Swedish infrastructure. It is about road safety, it is about competitiveness, and it is about managing the state's resources. Hold Sweden together! Hold together the long-term perspective that infrastructure requires! And, Mr. Speaker, appoint an infrastructure commission!

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

Magnus Jacobsson (KD)

Mr. Speaker! Road safety is an important area. In 2022, 253 people died in accidents across all types of traffic, and 104 of them were confirmed suicides. That was 14 fewer people than during 2021. The total number of deaths in traffic has decreased by 38 percent since 2007. It is pleasing that fatal accidents are decreasing, but we must continue to work on these issues.

I therefore consider it good that the government is now reviewing the rules regarding driving licenses and introducing probationary periods. It is also good that the government has taken the initiative to review the rules regarding A-tractors, as well as that the Minister for Infrastructure has come out and defended the current age limit for A-tractors.

A-tractors are significantly safer than EU mopeds. Therefore, it is good that we are working in different ways so that young people can also use these vehicles in the future. With that said, I am also pleased that we have increased safety through new rules regarding, for example, the seat belt as well as how many people are allowed to travel in an A-tractor.

Mr. Speaker! Some of the most important measures to improve road safety are to upgrade our roads and railways. Today's situation with lack of maintenance, lack of fencing and far too many wire fences means that we do not reach all traffic-hazardous sections. We will not be able to solve this with the current funding model. It is among other reasons why I already during the previous parliamentary term began to argue that we should find new ways to finance infrastructure.

Now I have the privilege of sitting on the Christian Democrats' social construction committee. There, I have been involved in developing several different models for how resources for infrastructure can be increased. Some methods that we have pointed out are loan financing, corporatization, toll roads, and more collaborative projects between municipalities, regions, and the state.

Road safety

Mr. Speaker! I know that we do not have a budget debate today. But it is not possible to talk about road safety without also reflecting on the fact that increased safety will require more resources. When the Riksdag in 1980 removed the investment budget, one practically halved the investments in roads and railways, which is one of the reasons why we today have major deficiencies in our transport system.

Mr. Speaker! It is not all about money. Technological developments that improve vehicles, the construction of roads, railings, and so on have contributed to fewer accidents. Future technological developments regarding AI, digitalization, self-driving vehicles, and vehicles that sense other vehicles will, in the long run, lead to even fewer accidents occurring.

Mr. Speaker! It is difficult to talk about road safety today without making a brief reflection on the accident in Örebro, or accidents at home in Stenungsund or accidents elsewhere along our transport systems. If we are to be able to build away dangerous intersections, we must work with resources. But we will also need to work with new technology.

Mr. Speaker! With this short speech, I move for approval of the committee's proposal in the report and rejection of all motions.

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 6 March.)

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