Brussels, 28/02/2014 (Agence Europe) - Except for a number of major railway operators, the adoption during the first reading of the 4th railway package on Wednesday 26 February, has not left a lot of people feeling very happy. Several European railway freight organisations have identified weaknesses in the texts ratified by MEPs on the political pillar, particularly the changes to railway governance in the context of total rail liberalisation. The technical pillar was supposed to simplify authorisation and train certification procedures in Europe but has instead been met with unanimous criticism from railways in Europe.
Railway model. The Community of European Railways (CER) represents the major European railway monopolies and was delighted with the vote, particularly the model of railway governance, as approved by MEPs in the report by Saïd El Khadraoui (S&D, Belgium: see interview). The amendments from MEPs Frigo (S&D, Italy), Ertug (S&D, Germany), Pargneaux (S&D, France), Zeribi (Greens, France), Reul (EPP, Germany), were largely inspired from the positions of the different organisations in the industry and were approved during plenary, after heated debates at the different European Parliament groups and despite the recommendations from the Parliament's transport committee. The president of the CER, Christian Kern, CEO of the Austrian railway holding company OBB, said that he was, “very happy” to witness the intense dialogue between members of the European Parliament and CER, which had led to reasonable legislative solutions. He asserted that it is undeniable that we have to ensure non-discriminatory access to the network and we have to enhance regulatory provisions.
The watering down of rules on the independence of network managers within railway holdings was strongly criticised by a number of other European railway actors, who denounced the railway company monopoly lobby. The European Railway Freight Association (ERFA) deplored the fact that Parliament had not supported the full independence of infrastructure managers and limited their decision-making capacity. The British railway freight association, where the market has already been liberalised, criticised the fact that crossed financing could lead to favourable treatment for incumbent operators compared to new companies entering the market. These groups are still afraid of the ability of the major operators to undermine their businesses, as explained by the Rail Freight Group. Freight loaders, organised in the association CLECAT, criticised the failure of MEPs to ensure a modern legislative framework that would allow for fair market access.
Public service. The European unions protested in front of the European Parliament in Strasbourg on the day before the vote, and were not really reassured by the provisions adopted that aim to protect the public nature of the railways. Although direct public service contracts are guaranteed, the procedure is subject to extremely harsh conditions to the extent that having access to them will be very difficult in practice, explained Sabine Trier, the deputy secretary general of the European Transport Workers Federation. This was also echoed by the European Centre of Employers and Enterprises Providing Public Services (CEEP), which also criticised the “disproportionate and inadequate” prerequisites. It affirmed that the amended regulation created more legal uncertainty and complications.
The unions, however, welcomed the efforts by MEPs to protect workers in the event of contract transfers and social dumping. (MD)