2024-06-182023/24:TU18 · p.1TUTransport & infrastructure
Division of responsibility within infrastructure planning
Division of responsibility and cross-party coordination in infrastructure planning
What's at stake: Infrastructure investments often span decades and involve large sums, so the form of long-term political anchoring - not least around railway planning - affects how stable and coordinated the investments become across several parliamentary terms.
Case texts and AI reasoning are AI-translated from the Swedish originals; the Swedish text is authoritative.
What the vote decides
The question is whether today's arrangement, where the government leads planning and Parliament decides on overarching goals and financial frameworks roughly once per parliamentary term, is sufficient, or whether a permanent cross-party body for infrastructure issues should be established.
Yes Yes — the committee proposal
The committee rejects the motions on the division of responsibility. The reason is that an established planning process already exists with a clear division of responsibility between Parliament, the government and the responsible authority, under which Parliament decides on strategic direction and financial frameworks roughly once per parliamentary term, and the committee finds this a sound arrangement that does not need to change.
No No — the reservations
Reservation 1 (S, V, C, MP)
The reservation (S, V, C, MP) wants to establish a standing cross-party infrastructure council, modeled on the Defence Commission, in which all parliamentary parties take part. The reasoning is that infrastructure investments span decades and, in the reservation's view, require broader political anchoring and long-term consistency, particularly ahead of work on a new national plan and in light of the new security-policy situation.
Summarised from the committee report. Party labels in the summary come from the report, not from the vote.
What do the votes mean here?
Yes The committee proposal: rejecting the motions (keeping things as they are).
No Backing the counter-proposal: reservation 1 by S, V, C, MP.
Abstain The party marks a position of its own that is not one of the two final alternatives.
What each plan points to — and how the party voted
For each party: the vote its own election manifesto and party programme point to in this case, next to how the party actually voted. A plan can only point to Yes or No; a party can also abstain.
| Plan | Vote | Confidence | Evidence | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V | No | No 0/20/0/4 | follows the plan | confidence: medium | derived |
| S | No | No 0/93/0/13 | follows the plan | confidence: low | derived |
| MP | No | No 0/15/0/3 | follows the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| C | No | No 0/21/0/3 | follows the plan | confidence: medium | not addressed |
| L | No | Yes 13/0/0/3 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| KD | No | Yes 16/0/0/3 | departs from the plan | confidence: medium | not addressed |
| M | Yes | Yes 60/0/0/8 | follows the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
| SD | No | Yes 63/0/0/9 | departs from the plan | confidence: low | not addressed |
Committee proposal
The Riksdag rejects the motions 2023/24:1878 by Daniel Helldén et al. (MP) claim 2, 2023/24:2346 by Nooshi Dadgostar et al. (V) claim 3, 2023/24:2457 by Muharrem Demirok et al. (C) claim 28, 2023/24:2625 by Gunilla Svantorp et al. (S) claim 2, 2023/24:2897 by Linda W Snecker et al. (V) claim 4 and 2023/24:2899 by Gunilla Svantorp et al. (S) claim 2.
Original (Swedish)
Riksdagen avslår motionerna 2023/24:1878 av Daniel Helldén m.fl. (MP) yrkande 2, 2023/24:2346 av Nooshi Dadgostar m.fl. (V) yrkande 3, 2023/24:2457 av Muharrem Demirok m.fl. (C) yrkande 28, 2023/24:2625 av Gunilla Svantorp m.fl. (S) yrkande 2, 2023/24:2897 av Linda W Snecker m.fl. (V) yrkande 4 och 2023/24:2899 av Gunilla Svantorp m.fl. (S) yrkande 2.
Riksdag decision: The Riksdag has considered a letter from the government concerning the Swedish National Audit Office's report on a national plan for transport infrastructure. The Swedish National Audit Office's overall conclusion is that investments in the national plan contribute to achieving transport policy goals but not in an efficient manner. In its letter, the government welcomes the Swedish National Audit Office's review and considers it an important contribution to the work of developing a new national plan. The government is in the process of preparing a new infrastructure bill in order to make a decision on a new national plan in 2026 and views the Swedish National Audit Office's observations and recommendations as supporting material for the continued process. The Riksdag referred the government's letter to the records, that is, closed the matter. At the same time, the Riksdag rejected proposals in motions, of which approximately 380 are from the regular motion period 2023. The proposals concern, for example, infrastructure planning, starting points for planning, measures in infrastructure, and financing and efficiency issues. The Riksdag refers, among other things, to the ongoing work to develop a new national plan for transport infrastructure.
Counter-proposals
- The counter-proposal wants to establish an infrastructure committee with all parliamentary parties for long-term infrastructure planning. (S, V, C, MP) — Reservation 1
Plan vs actual vote
Every party, in chamber order: what its own plan pointed to, how it voted, and the reasoning behind both. Highlighted rows are where the two differ — but a vote that follows the plan is a result too, so the reasoning is there for every party.
The plan demands that planning has genuine democratic anchoring and wants to develop more comprehensive democratic coordination of the economy's direction, where major decisions are made democratically.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan demands that planning has genuine democratic anchoring and wants to develop more comprehensive democratic coordination of the economy's direction, where major decisions are made democratically. The counter-proposal's demand for a standing cross-party infrastructure preparedness with all parties responds to that, as does the plan's demand for patient and long-term political work and a comprehensive long-term investment plan.
Original (Swedish)
Planen kräver att planeringen har en genuin demokratisk förankring och vill utveckla en mer övergripande demokratisk samordning av ekonomins riktning, där de stora besluten fattas demokratiskt. Motförslagets krav på en stående tvärpolitisk infrastrukturberedning med alla partier svarar mot det, liksom mot planens krav på tålmodigt och långsiktigt politiskt arbete och en omfattande långsiktig investeringsplan.
- genuine democratic anchoringdecisive»Planeringen behöver en genuin demokratisk« (party programme ↗)“Planning needs genuine democratic”
- democratic coordination of major decisions»Vi vill utveckla mer övergripande demokratisk samordning av« (party programme ↗)“We want to develop more comprehensive democratic coordination of”
- long-term investment plan»Det behövs en omfattande och långsiktig investeringsplan för det,« (party programme ↗)“It requires a comprehensive and long-term investment plan for that,”
- long-term strategic work»Politiskt arbete behöver vara tålmodigt, långsiktigt och strategiskt.« (party programme ↗)“Political work needs to be patient, long-term and strategic.”
The party programme states that political responsibility can never be transferred to unelected officials and that infrastructure is a national responsibility, and the election manifesto explicitly seeks broad cross-party agreements on long-term investments, such as in energy policy.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The party programme states that political responsibility can never be transferred to unelected officials and that infrastructure is a national responsibility, and the election manifesto explicitly seeks broad cross-party agreements on long-term investments, such as in energy policy. A standing cross-party infrastructure committee with all parties is in line with this. The plan does not specifically address the planning procedure, so the conclusion is derived.
Original (Swedish)
Partiprogrammet slår fast att det politiska ansvaret aldrig kan överlämnas till icke valda ämbetsmän och att infrastrukturen är ett nationellt ansvar, och valmanifestet söker uttryckligen breda blocköverskridande överenskommelser om långsiktiga investeringar, som i energipolitiken. En stående tvärpolitisk infrastrukturberedning med samtliga partier ligger i linje med detta. Planen behandlar inte planeringsordningen särskilt, varför slutsatsen är härledd.
- political responsibility for decisionsdecisive»ansvaret kan aldrig överlämnas till icke valda ämbetsmän.« (party programme ↗)“responsibility can never be transferred to unelected officials.”
- cross-party agreements»Efter valet vill vi se en ny energiöverenskommelse för Sveriges bästa, och vill därför föra energipolitiska samtal med andra partier om allt från vindkraft till kärnkraft.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“After the election, we want to see a new energy agreement for Sweden's benefit, and therefore want to conduct energy policy talks with other parties about everything from wind power to nuclear power.”
- functioning infrastructure»Ett framgångsrikt näringsliv kräver en väl fungerande infrastruktur.« (party programme ↗)“A successful business requires well-functioning infrastructure.”
- new security policy situation»Dagens nya situation kräver en omläggning av svensk säkerhetspolitik.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Today's new situation requires a reorientation of Swedish security policy.”
The plan states that long-term thinking is crucial in social planning and that society itself must direct and oversee the development of infrastructure systems, with stable and long-term rules of the game.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan states that long-term thinking is crucial in social planning and that society itself must direct and oversee the development of infrastructure systems, with stable and long-term rules of the game. A standing cross-party board that gives investments over decades wider anchoring serves that long-termism. The plan, however, says nothing about the division of responsibility in planning, which is why the position is weakly substantiated.
Original (Swedish)
Planen slår fast att långsiktighet är avgörande i samhällsplaneringen och att samhället självt måste styra och stå för utbyggnaden av infrastruktursystemen, med stabila och långsiktiga spelregler. En stående tvärpolitisk beredning som ger investeringar över decennier bredare förankring tjänar den långsiktigheten. Planen säger dock inget om planeringens ansvarsfördelning, varför ställningstagandet är svagt underbyggt.
- long-term social planningdecisive»Långsiktighet är inte bara ett synsätt inom miljöpolitiken utan även avgörande när det gäller samhällsplanering och ekonomisk politik.« (party programme ↗)“Long-term thinking is not just an approach within environmental policy but also crucial for social planning and economic policy.”
- society directs infrastructure»Samhället måste själv styra och stå för utbyggnad av infrastruktursystemen.« (party programme ↗)“Society must itself direct and oversee the development of infrastructure systems.”
- stable rules of the game»Vi vill se stabila och långsiktiga spelregler för företag och hushåll för att underlätta detta.« (party programme ↗)“We want to see stable and long-term rules of the game for businesses and households to facilitate this.”
The election manifesto sets cooperation and long-term, common solutions with parties from both left and right before political point-scoring, and calls for the courage to cooperate across the traditional block border for broad solutions in an anxious time.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The election manifesto sets cooperation and long-term, common solutions with parties from both left and right before political point-scoring, and calls for the courage to cooperate across the traditional block border for broad solutions in an anxious time. Infrastructure commitments in the manifesto, such as new trunk railways and refurbished railways, stretch over decades and require precisely such anchoring. A standing cross-party infrastructure committee with all parties therefore lies in line with the plan.
Original (Swedish)
Valmanifestet sätter samarbete och långsiktiga, gemensamma lösningar med partier från både vänster och höger framför politiskt spel, och efterlyser mod att samarbeta över blockgränsen för breda lösningar i en orolig tid. Infrastrukturåtagandena i manifestet, som nya stambanor och upprustade järnvägar, sträcker sig över decennier och kräver just sådan förankring. En stående tvärpolitisk infrastrukturberedning med samtliga partier ligger därför i linje med planen.
- broad long-term solutionsdecisive»Vi värderar samarbete, ansvarstagande och resultat framför politiskt spel. Vi prioriterar långsiktiga, gemensamma lösningar med partier från både vänster och höger.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“We value cooperation, responsibility and results over political point-scoring. We prioritise long-term, common solutions with parties from both left and right.”
- long-term railway investments»Vi vill rusta upp regionala järnvägar, bygga nya stambanor från norr till söder, höja standarden på det nationella stambanenätet i hela landet och storsatsa på morgondagens tågtrafik« (2022 manifesto ↗)“We want to upgrade regional railways, build new trunk railways from north to south, raise the standard on the national trunk rail network throughout the country and invest heavily in tomorrow's rail transport”
- cooperation across the block border»Det bästa för Sverige vore om fler partier hade mod att samarbeta över den traditionella blockgränsen.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“The best for Sweden would be if more parties had the courage to cooperate across the traditional block border.”
- coordinated national planning»Statliga myndigheter måste samverka och arbeta marksnålt när man tar ny mark i anspråk för väg, tåg, el, etc.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“National authorities must cooperate and work efficiently when taking new land for road, rail, electricity, etc.”
The plan says nothing about how infrastructure planning's decision-making shall be organized.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan says nothing about how infrastructure planning's decision-making shall be organized. The nearest principle is that predictability in the state's actions strengthens the individual's sense of security and that Sweden needs continued major investments in infrastructure, which speaks for broader and more long-term anchoring of decisions that run over decades. The plan also wants more people to be given the opportunity to follow and influence the political process.
Original (Swedish)
Planen säger inget om hur infrastrukturplaneringens beslutsformer ska organiseras. Den närmast liggande principen är att förutsägbarhet i statens agerande stärker den enskildes trygghet och att Sverige behöver fortsatt stora investeringar i infrastruktur, vilket talar för bredare och mer långsiktig förankring av beslut som löper över decennier. Planen vill också att fler ges möjlighet att följa och påverka den politiska processen.
- predictable state actionsdecisive»När förutsägbarheten i statens agerande ökar stärks också den enskildes trygghet.« (party programme ↗)“When predictability in the state's actions increases, the individual's sense of security is also strengthened.”
- long-term infrastructure investments»Sverige behöver fortsatt stora investeringar i infrastruktur.« (party programme ↗)“Sweden needs continued major investments in infrastructure.”
- transparency in political processes»möjligheter att följa den politiska processen och påverka beslutsfattandet.« (party programme ↗)“opportunities to follow the political process and influence decision-making.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan makes it a political task to secure the long-term rules of the game for society, requires a long-term high investment level in infrastructure and lifts the pursuit of consensus over confrontation as a hallmark of Christian democracy.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan makes it a political task to secure the long-term rules of the game for society, requires a long-term high investment level in infrastructure and lifts the pursuit of consensus over confrontation as a hallmark of Christian democracy. A standing cross-party infrastructure committee responds to this. Therefore the requirement is supported.
Original (Swedish)
Planen gör det till en politisk uppgift att säkerställa de långsiktiga spelreglerna för samhället, kräver en långsiktigt hög investeringsnivå i infrastrukturen och lyfter sökandet efter samförstånd framför konfrontation som ett kännetecken för kristdemokratin. En stående tvärpolitisk infrastrukturberedning svarar mot detta. Därför stöds kravet.
- long-term rules of the gamedecisive»att säkerställa de långsiktiga spelreglerna för samhället.« (party programme ↗)“to secure the long-term rules of the game for society.”
- consensus over confrontation»istället för konfrontation är ett kännetecken för kristdemokratin.« (party programme ↗)“instead of confrontation is a hallmark of Christian democracy.”
- high investment level»investeringsnivån i kommunikationssystemens infrastruktur« (party programme ↗)“investment level in communication systems infrastructure”
- stewardship and long-term thinking»Alla politiska beslut bör fattas i enlighet med förvaltarskapsprincipen« (party programme ↗)“All political decisions must be made in accordance with the stewardship principle”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan says nothing about the forms for infrastructure planning's division of responsibility.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan says nothing about the forms for infrastructure planning's division of responsibility. The nearest principles are that politics must prioritize and choose, that processing times should be shortened and that the plan already makes clear choices about what shall be built. A standing cross-party commission with all parties is a new structure that the plan does not call for.
Original (Swedish)
Planen säger inget om formerna för infrastrukturplaneringens ansvarsfördelning. Närmast liggande principer är att politiken måste prioritera och välja bort, att handläggningstider ska kortas och att planen redan gör tydliga vägval om vad som ska byggas. En stående tvärpolitisk beredning med samtliga partier är en ny struktur som planen inte efterfrågar.
- politics must prioritizedecisive»Politiken har en viktig uppgift att prioritera och välja bort,« (party programme ↗)“Politics has an important task to prioritize and choose,”
- clear own choices»Rusta upp dagens järnväg i stället för att satsa på höghastighetståg som riskerar att vara omoderna redan innan de är klara« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Upgrade today's railway instead of investing in high-speed trains that risk being outdated before they are finished”
- faster processes»Korta myndigheternas handläggningstider genom en bortre tidsgräns« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Shorten authorities' processing times through a time limit”
The plan requires long-term policy with predictable processes and wants to upgrade the road and rail network across the country, while Sweden should be prepared for the changed security situation.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan requires long-term policy with predictable processes and wants to upgrade the road and rail network across the country, while Sweden should be prepared for the changed security situation. A standing cross-party committee for investments running over decades serves that long-term perspective. The plan says nothing about how planning should be organized, so the support is derived.
Original (Swedish)
Planen kräver en långsiktig politik med förutsägbara processer och vill rusta upp väg- och järnvägsnätet i hela landet, samtidigt som Sverige ska rustas för det förändrade säkerhetsläget. En stående tvärpolitisk beredning för investeringar som löper över decennier tjänar den långsiktigheten. Planen säger dock inget om hur planeringen ska organiseras, varför stödet är härlett.
- long-term and predictable policydecisive»En förutsättning för att lönsamma investeringar ska kunna göras är en långsiktig politik som tar hänsyn till industrins behov av en förutsägbar process.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“A prerequisite for profitable investments to be made is long-term policy that takes into account industry's need for a predictable process.”
- upgraded infrastructure»Rusta upp väg- och järnvägsnätet i hela landet« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Upgrade the road and rail network across the country”
- readiness in new security situation»Rusta Sverige inför en ny säkerhetspolitisk situation i vårt närområde« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Prepare Sweden for a new security policy situation in our neighbourhood”
- reprioritized investments»Stoppa planerna på dyr höghastighetsjärnväg mellan storstäderna« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Stop plans for expensive high-speed rail between major cities”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
Share and embed
Sources and documents
- The committee report on riksdagen.se (2023/24:TU18)
- Committee report full text (HB01TU18)
- Per-MP voting data (API)
- Case status (API)
Documents under consideration
- Motion 2023/24:1000 — Militär mobilitet genom Jämtlands län av Kalle Olsson och Anna-Caren Sätherberg (båda S)
- Motion 2023/24:1021 — Inlandsbanan av Anna-Caren Sätherberg och Kalle Olsson (båda S)
- Motion 2023/24:1022 — Ökad transparens kring fördelningen av länsplanemedel av Kalle Olsson och Anna-Caren Sätherberg (båda S)
- Motion 2023/24:1042 — Nya stambanor av Niklas Sigvardsson m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2023/24:1083 — Infrastruktur av Azra Muranovic m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2023/24:1099 — Säkerställ Ostlänken av John E Weinerhall (M)
- Motion 2023/24:1102 — Långsiktig finansiering av infrastruktur av Lars Püss (M)
- Motion 2023/24:1115 — Konkurrenskraftiga transporter i Stockholm-Mälardalen av Fredrik Ahlstedt och Anna af Sillén (båda M)
- Motion 2023/24:1118 — Trafikverkets makt över kommunernas planarbete av Jan Ericson (M)
- Motion 2023/24:1154 — Färdigställande av riksväg 40 till dubbelfilig väg av Staffan Eklöf och Björn Tidland (båda SD)
- Motion 2023/24:1167 — Stärkt tillväxt i Norden med dubbelspår mellan Oslo och Göteborg av Ann-Sofie Alm (M)
- Motion 2023/24:1169 — Trygga och säkra vägar i Fyrbodal av Ann-Sofie Alm (M)
- Motion 2023/24:1189 — Utredning av statligt ansvar för järnvägen Halmstad-Nässjö av Staffan Eklöf och Eric Westroth (båda SD)
- Motion 2023/24:1194 — Dubbelspår på hela Skånebanan av Per-Arne Håkansson m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2023/24:1215 — Framtidssäkring av det svenska vägnätet av Alireza Akhondi (C)
- Motion 2023/24:1218 — Trafiksituationen i Ystad av Stina Larsson (C)
- Motion 2023/24:1225 — Situationsanpassade regelverk vid infrastrukturplanering av Martina Johansson (C)
- Motion 2023/24:1249 — Turismöversiktsplan av Martina Johansson och Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist (båda C)
- Motion 2023/24:1285 — Förverkligande av Öresundsmetron - för jobb och utveckling i södra Sverige av Joakim Sandell och Rose-Marie Carlsson (båda S)
- Motion 2023/24:1324 — Säkerställa och färdigställa Hjulstabron av Lena Johansson och Fredrik Olovsson (båda S)
Source: The Swedish Parliament