Over the last 25 years the European railway transport market confrunted with a series of strategic and technical changes meant for the restructuring of the national railway systems and in order to strengthen the position of railways vis-à-vis other transport modes.
Some of the efforts have been concentrating on three major objectives as the opening of the rail transport market to competition, improving the interoperability and safety of national networks and developing rail transport infrastructure. They are known as the Railway Packages 1,2 and 3.
Opening up national freight and passenger markets to cross-border competition has been a major step towards creating an integrated European railway area and a genuine European Union internal market for rail. A more competitive and efficient rail industry is a prerequisite for achieving the targets of reducing emissions.
One of the most important projects within the last decade was the vote and the implementation of the Fourth Railway Package with its Technical and Market Pillars. The Railway Package was finally concluded December last, when, the European Parliament adopted the so called “market pillar” proposals of the Fourth Railway Package, a series of measures that will make European railway more attractive, innovative and competitive. The measures will foster the completion of the single European railway area by opening up for competition domestic rail passenger markets, improving the impartiality of infrastructure managers and strengthening national rail regulators.
The “market pillar” will introduce open access for domestic passenger services as of 2020. The principle of competitive tendering of public service contracts in rail will follow at the latest by 2023. Established railway companies will be obliged to become more competitive in order to withstand competition from new entrants. Competition will encourage railway companies to become more responsive to customer needs and make rail a better alternative to cars or planes. Passengers are likely to profit from lower fares, in particular on commercial lines.
The Fourth Railway Package will also provide a good framework for investment generating significant opportunities for the growth of railway undertakings. Consequently, this has the potential to positively affect job growth and securing high-quality employment.
The provisions of the Fourth Railway Package, the accessibility of the European railway network, railway interoperability and safety, environmental protection, the fair competition and other important issue are tackled in the next pages.
The European Parliament recently adopted the Market Pillar of the IV Railway Package. As you announced, you voted against the new legislation because the texts would bring no improvements. Would you please give us more details about the norms in the Package, and how could they bring more improvements to the developement of the rail transport passenger market?
Michael Cramer: First of all let me stress that I am in favour of competition in the railway sector. But under the recently adopted framework we have to admit that effective competition will maybe take place in 20 or 30 years only. And I honestly think that it does not make sense to adopt laws that maybe – and only maybe – have some effect in 30 years’ time…for me, that is crazy!
The truth is: we need fair competition as soon as possible. I will give you an example why. The state-owned French Railway Company SNCF makes 40% of its total revenue outside of France. At the same time, other railway companies have no access to the French railway market. The SNCF thus benefits from a protected domestic market while it competes on other markets. This is a market distortion and simply unfair – in a double sense! You can’t be in favour of competition all over the world – but not at home. And this state of play may continue to exist for the next 20 or 30 years. That is unacceptable.
Initially the Market Pillar was supposed to introduce competitive tendering as the norm. This failed. My goal was to create competition that benefits the users: 1. To find the best solution and concepts 2. To reduce the costs. But not at the expense of the employees! There should be a transfer of staff under fair conditions.
I am in favour of competition but only when social and environmental issues are taken into account. The inclusion of social standards should be a binding principle for all calls for tender. But this principle is not part of the adopted Market Pillar. Therefore we, as Greens, voted against the outcome of the negotiations. We care deeply about social issues, environmental issues and the best deal for passengers of public transport!
Could you tell us, in a few words, what do you consider to be the most important priorities of the European railway sector over the next five years, in order to achieve a more sustainable development?
Michael Cramer: First of all, full interoperability must be accomplished to achieve a competitive railway sector – across all transport modes. Because right now it is easier to go by car from Lisbon to Tallinn than by train. It is almost impossible. Mainly because of the different national technical standards. Interoperability is an absolute must for a brighter future of the railway sector. In this sense interoperability plays a major role in the Technical Pillar of the IV Railway Package.
The European Railway Traffic Management System (ERTMS) is supposed to be the foundation for interoperability. 12 years ago I was responsible for the ERTMS file in the European Parliament. It is a good system, with worldwide acceptance and success. But today there are more than 12,000 km of tracks equipped with ERTMS. But not a single locomotive can run on all these tracks because Member States added national requirements and thereby created different variants of ERTMS. This undermines interoperability with ERTMS in others Member States. So we lost more than 10 years and a lot of money. A huge setback for the train sector!
Against this background it was a hard fight to create a more efficient process for vehicle authorisation in Europe. In the future the European Union Agency for the Railways (ERA) is the only authority that can issue EU-wide authorisations. For purely domestic traffic, the manufacturers can choose between applying to their national safety authority or to the ERA, but all authorities share a common IT system to ensure coherent decisions and prevent duplication and conflicts. We are putting in place a one-stop shop for vehicle authorisation and safety certification in the EU in order to enhance safety and reduce costs. Until now it sometimes takes 2 years or 3 years and costs millions of euros to obtain the authorisation for one locomotive. Now we have European authorisations and licenses! That is the biggest step forward in the IV Railway Package!
Yes, this is good for the railway industry…
Michael Cramer: For the railway industry and for the environment and, of course, for our fight against climate change. Because our problem is that there is unfair competition between the modes of transport. For example, each locomotive in Europe has to pay for a train path. For road transport, Member States can decide freely whether they charge road tolls. In Germany, for instance, this only happens on highways and some major roads, and only for trucks heavier than 7,5 tons.
So, if you compare the figures, 100% of the railway network is tolled but only 1% of the road network. We have to put an end to this unfair treatment!
If you compare the environmentally-friendly railways with aviation you notice that the airlines get 30 billion euros every year because they don’t pay kerosene tax, and on internal relations, they are also exempted from Valued-Added Tax. The users of the railways have to pay all these taxes which makes the railways artificially cheap. And that is crazy! I therefore pledge: either everybody has to pay energy tax or nobody; either everybody has to pay value added tax or nobody!
In your opinion, with all these legislative measures adopted, would the railway sector become more competitive vis-à-vis other modes of transport and more customer orientated?
Michael Cramer: No, and this is a pity. The European Commission and the Member States only look at each mode of transport in isolation. But it’s intermodal competition that matters most! I can tell you that in Germany, for instance, the toll on roads has been reduced by 13% over the past three years, whereas the track access charges for rail have soared by 15%. That is crazy but reality!
But how could we make the rail transport more attractive, especially in the South-Eastern European countries, because they still have financing problems regarding the construction of new rail infrastructure, problems with the implementation of ERTMS, problems regarding the finaancing for the purchase of new rolling stock, and so on…?
Michael Cramer: In the South-East European countries the biggest problem is that in the last 20 years they were looking almost exclusively at road transport and they have used the European money mainly for roads. And when they used these funds for the railways they focused on the large-scale projects that may be completed in 30 or 40 years only. Instead, we need to concentrate on bridging the gaps along the borders. But after 30 years of investments in cross-border sections, the European railways are still a patchwork – with gaps mainly at the borders.
The focus on high-speed trains in misguided, I believe. Only 5% of the passengers in Europe travel on high-speed trains. In this sense small projects are most of the time much more efficient. For example: in Usedom (a Baltic Sea island in Pomerania), German Railways wanted to cut the connection in 1992. Today, after repair and upgrading, the route has seen an overall increase of passenger numbers by 1,000%. This shows: we can’t ignore the small projects! But there is also progress in the EU: In face of growing criticism, the European Commission has for the first time decided to create a dedicated budget line for smaller cross-border projects. EUR 110 million have been made available. This could be used, for instance, for the missing link between Brussels and Valenciennes in France, where the European Railway Agency has its headquarters. By restoring 800 meters of track, the travel time can be cut by 1 hour!
This is hard to see that most countries prefer the road transport even though the railways are more eco-friendly. The problem seems to be the same everywhere…
Michael Cramer: Not everywhere! In Switzerland is different! The wonderful example of Switzerland contrasts with the bad one of the corridor between Rotterdam – Genoa. This corridor is the most important one in Europe and therefore 20 years ago Italy, Germany, Switzerland and the Netherlands have signed the Treaty of Lugano, stipulating that there will be a tunnel through the Alps financed by Switzerland. But the connections to this tunnel have to be built by the other countries, and they are not on schedule at all. It may take up to 2041 to finalise the connections.
Then, Member States should have more agreements and more committments towards railways…
Michael Cramer: Yes, I always say to the Commission that if they give money, for example in Germany, for Nürnberg – Erfurt, then I will say it’s ok; you will only get the money if the cross-border gaps are closed in the next three or four years. And EU funds should be spent primarily on the rehabilitation of abandoned cross-border sections. This is what I call European added value!
Regarding the investment, do you believe that for the South-Eastern European countries, high speed is suitable or should they first modernise the major lines between the most important cities in their countries?
Michael Cramer: First of all, because I don’t know exactly the example of Southern part but in the Northern part, in the Baltic States, I took, 10 years ago, the train from Berlin to Tallinn. The ride took 60 hours while, before the Second World War, it only took 27 hours.
I hope the Rail Baltica project will be started now but the line is for a speed of 220 km/h. That is ok because it can be used also for freight and for regional trains.
It’s the same for the Southern part. The main issue is not high speed but a real network with safe, reliable and high-quality connections for everyday life.
Speaking of Romania, you have visited the country to learn about the latest developments. In your opinion, is it developing in the right direction with the IV Paneuropean rail corridor, is Romania making enough efforts in order to develop the railway transport?
Michael Cramer: Of course more efforts are always good and possible! But I am mainly concerned with the new General Master Plan for Transport in Romania. Namely the initial idea to cut 40% of the Romanian railway network was extremely worrying. And now it is difficult to obtain up-to-date information. The more recent versions of the plan seemed to go in the right direction. I call upon the Romanian government to focus on the best use of all railway lines instead of closing them. Such decisions cannot be easily undone, and the railways are a network industry where it has severe consequences if you cut feeder lines.
But let me stress one important aspect. The bridge via the Danube, from Vidin to Calafat. This is a highway bridge but it is also a railway bridge and is also a cycling bridge. You can use this bridge for railways, for cars and also for cycling because the Danube trail is very important for bike tourism. So this was a good example, but is was for the pressure of the European Parliament this bridge was realised. At the beginning, they only wanted to have a highway bridge. And you know that between Romania and Bulgaria, before, there was only one connection, one bridge between Giurgiu and Ruse and not more.
Elena Ilie is talking with…
Mr Michael Cramer, Member and former Chairman of the Committee on Transport and Tourism (TRAN) of the European Parliament
Share on:
