Brussels, 29/01/2013 (Agence Europe) - Three interest groups from the railway sector representing freight (ERFA), infrastructure managers (EIM) and railway companies (CER) agreed to answer our last minute quiz on the fourth railway package - which the European Commission will present on Wednesday 30 January. The reform is expected mainly to liberalise domestic passenger traffic and define a model of governance for the sector. The three organisations speak about their expectations and address a final message to European Commissioner for Transport Siim Kallas. (MD/transl.fl)
Agence Europe (AE): Is this reform a guarantee of success for the future of the sector?
François Coart (FC), President of the European Rail Freight Association (ERFA): It's something crucial. We will live every day with what is defined in the fourth railway package. This must include three essential points. One of them is consensual but very important - that's the European Railway Agency (ERA). If there is more ERA there will be more interoperability. The second point is opening up to passengers. I can say less on this, although 80-95% of the problems are common to freight. And lastly, there is the structural model. We are simply calling for new entrants to be able to do their work without discrimination.
Monika Heiming (MH), Executive Director of European Rail Infrastructure Managers (EIM): The fourth railway package is overdue. All actors are expecting a clear signal from the Commission on how to finalise the unified European rail market. We warmly welcome the Commission's wish to eliminate the obstacles to the unified European rail market while at the same time consolidating the performance, competitiveness and growth of the railways. EIM firmly believes that infrastructure managers have a key role to play in this process.
Libor Lochman (LL), Executive Director of the Community of European Railway and Infrastructure Companies (CER): For us, what plays an important role for improving the rail regulation in the future is the first part on the simplification of the authorisation and certification processes. It should really give us an opportunity to bring the equipment of the rolling stock and vehicles on the track faster, quicker and cheaper. This is really an essential precondition if the Commission wishes to see an opening of the market and new entrants coming to the business. You can hardly find a company who would be ready to wait 3 - 4 years for authorisation and certification! If this part of the package was already here, we would be more than happy!
AE: What railway model do you advocate?
FC: We have come to the conclusion that the simplest, cheapest and most direct model, which does not raise any suspicion of conflict of interest, is separation. This is really not a dogma, it's a conclusion. We are calling for something that can be completely neutral. Lastly, I am extremely concerned at seeing the two dominant market operators (Ed: Deutsche Bahn of Germany and SNCF of France) bringing such pressure to bear in order to keep the control of the infrastructure.
MH: EIM supports all proposals that dispel any doubts about infrastructure managers' neutrality. Only regulations that preclude conflicts of interest among infrastructure managers from the outset can guarantee an efficient, high-performance rail market. Three conditions are needed to meet the expectations of the market and of customers: a strengthening of competences, a consolidation of competences and greater independence for infrastructure managers.
LL: We do not have any special preference for each model. What needs to be achieved is a non-discriminatory access to the market. It is a priority. It doesn't mean this is strictly linked to what the EC believes - that the only model is the legal separation between the train operating companies and the infrastructure manager. We are in favour of the flexibility of models. It's not that we are only defending holding structures. Member states should be responsible for defining the optimum governance model of the rail system of their country on the basis of impact assessment. There can be and there should be provisions that clearly define the responsibilities of infrastructure managers, whether it is part of the holding, or totally separated.
AE: What message would you give to Commissioner Kallas in this final step?
FC: The railway package must remain unaltered, and must include its three pillars. This is a question of credibility for European construction. Congratulations on his courage for implementing everything to contribute to the success of the great European project of free circulation and competition of goods, services and persons.
MH: The proposals of the fourth railway package are intertwined and cannot be discussed separately. The fourth railway package aims at completing the liberalisation process by removing the remaining legal barriers, while at the same time enhancing the quality and efficiency of rail services by removing institutional and technical obstacles. Therefore the proposals should be presented and discussed as a package and not in separate bits and pieces.
LL: Do listen to the stakeholders and do prioritise the parts of the package, because we can really achieve a lot if we progress quickly on the simplification of processes. There is a huge risk that the whole package will be blocked in the case where this part is bundled to the two other parts (Ed: governance and passenger market opening). There is so huge a variety of opinions, that before finding a compromise, it will take more than one year. Also there are elections in 2014, so we risk that we will see nothing in 2014!