• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

A single European Railway system

Status
Not open for further replies.

gingerheid

Established Member
Joined
2 Apr 2006
Messages
1,723
LRT English - Single European Railway System in the Plans by 2023
There are plans to create a single continental railway system, aggregating train timetable data, ticketing and customer service, by 2030 to improve international rail connectivity in Europe.

Such plans were once again approved in Vilnius on Thursday by the CEOs of 60 European passenger transport companies, united by the Community of European Railway and Infrastructure Companies (CER) and the International Union of Railways (UIC), Lithuanian Railways (LTG) said.

The meeting also agreed on the need to complete the remaining sections of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) by 2030, and one of them is the Rail Baltica line that will integrate the Baltic states into the European rail network.

The EU Council approved the new TEN-T Regulation on June 13. The network connects the EU’s major cities, sea ports and airports, rail terminals and other transport hubs.

Lithuania’s Transport and Communications Ministry has previously said that the entire Rail Baltica project is due to be completed by 2030, and the Lithuanian and Polish gauges are to be connected in 2028.

The entire Rail Baltica line will connect Tallinn and Parnu in Estonia, Riga in Latvia, Panevėžys, Kaunas and Vilnius in Lithuania, and Warsaw in Poland.

This sounds like a fantastic idea, but is it realistic? Some countries don't really have an integrated national system, and the growth of open access operators and yield managed ticketing means things are going the opposite direction?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Flying Snail

Established Member
Joined
12 Dec 2006
Messages
2,046
Meanwhile in the real world RENFE, SNCF and Trenitalia are all sniping, backstabbing and busily plotting how to gazump each other on their profitable routes.
 

Stossgebet

Member
Joined
3 Oct 2024
Messages
196
Location
Midlands
Well, it was the eu, through it's four railway packages, that mandated smashing up all the state railways of the eu. Now they want what they call a "single european railway system".
I guess if they can legislate to smash up national railways to create what they have now, which is the 'eu single market for rail', they can then legislate to create some sort of eu unity for it all. Meanwhile, what do the electorates of eu countries even know about any of this, and how much of this did they consent to, and how much has it cost them?
 

gingerheid

Established Member
Joined
2 Apr 2006
Messages
1,723
Well, if you're pro open access operator then I guess the EU has been a wonderful thing (I'm not).

On the other hand there have been problems with operators not wanting to go to the extra hassle of running marginal services across borders, and of course there was the incident in Lithuania where they actually lifted track to block an international freight route!
 

Harpo

Established Member
Joined
21 Aug 2024
Messages
3,858
Location
Newport
The signalling system ETCS (part of ERTMS) has its origins in wanting to make long cross-border freight corridors within Europe more efficient, cutting out loco changes at every border/signalling system change.
 

Stossgebet

Member
Joined
3 Oct 2024
Messages
196
Location
Midlands
The signalling system ETCS (part of ERTMS) has its origins in wanting to make long cross-border freight corridors within Europe more efficient, cutting out loco changes at every border/signalling system change.
That could have been mandated by the eu, without having to smash up the state operators and tender everything to the private sector, in a never ending process of rebidding every 15-20 years.
 

nwales58

Established Member
Joined
15 Mar 2022
Messages
1,365
Location
notsure
Rail in the EU - remember our history in this. Splitting infrastructure and operations was primarily a British+Swedish idea (putting rail and road infrastructure on a comparable basis for investment/subsidy, ignoring the practical differences in operations). Look at Banverket's creation out of SJ.

We plus the Nordics, Dutch, Baltics were the main ones pushing competition as the solution to improving the continent's economics by lowering costs and reducing state subsidy. France and Italy were the main opposition.

Open access flowed from these 'northern' ideas that Britain was an important part of in the 90s-2000s. For freight in mainland Europe it has largely worked rather well. Passenger is different but at least it has clarified what inherently needs subsidy (most countries devolved all local public transport to regions at the same time, Britain is a weird exception) and what might be commercial.

Back on this CER/UIC initiative, UIC already has systems in this area, presumably this is a next step. Not my area so more may exist than I know about.

On ticketing, aviation has had independent global (distributed) timetable database, ticketing and settlement systems since teletype days in the 1960s, though ticketing is less important now that every major airline or alliance wants to keep its hands on its customers directly. A GDS for rail would mean customer -> retailer -> GDS -> operator.
 

stuu

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2011
Messages
3,766
Well, it was the eu, through it's four railway packages, that mandated smashing up all the state railways of the eu. Now they want what they call a "single european railway system".
I guess if they can legislate to smash up national railways to create what they have now, which is the 'eu single market for rail', they can then legislate to create some sort of eu unity for it all. Meanwhile, what do the electorates of eu countries even know about any of this, and how much of this did they consent to, and how much has it cost them?
The EU did nothing of the sort. The EU doesn't have any power to do that, unless the member states agree
 

Stossgebet

Member
Joined
3 Oct 2024
Messages
196
Location
Midlands
The EU did nothing of the sort. The EU doesn't have any power to do that, unless the member states agree
Erm. Sorrry. You confuse me.
Are you trying to say that these eu laws do not exist?
That's a very bizarre claim to make. Or a level of denial that you should perhaps keep to yourself! As the eu president, Von Der Leyen herself has said "eu law has supremacy over national law". The eu railway packages are an area of law where the eu has that 'competence'. And if after all these years of eu 'competence' you are just learning something new, then i am sorry to be the one that tells you that your national government in an eu member state has no legal power to do anything but comply with the eu law on this matter, and the structure it imposes on the railway. And of course, a new national government, regardless of its manifesto and campaiging, does not have the legal abilty to change that structure.

It is only because of brexit, that our new government can reintegrate the infrastructure and train operations, and scrap the competitive tendering mandated by the eu fourth railway package.
 

stuu

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2011
Messages
3,766
The European Union has no powers other than those it's member states agree to. It cannot pass laws as an entity without the agreement of either a unanimity or a majority of it's membership. The commission can and does propose laws but has absolutely no power to put those into law without the explicit agreement of it's members. So the railway packages were agreed by the members, they were not imposed by the EU. Once those laws are passed then they are transposed into national laws by each country, often in slightly different interpretations.

It is true that future national governments are bound by the decisions of previous governments, but that is the same for all international law
 

Stossgebet

Member
Joined
3 Oct 2024
Messages
196
Location
Midlands
T
The European Union has no powers other than those it's member states agree to. It cannot pass laws as an entity without the agreement of either a unanimity or a majority of it's membership. The commission can and does propose laws but has absolutely no power to put those into law without the explicit agreement of it's members. So the railway packages were agreed by the members, they were not imposed by the EU. Once those laws are passed then they are transposed into national laws by each country, often in slightly different interpretations.

It is true that future national governments are bound by the decisions of previous governments, but that is the same for all international law
The eu commission, currently lead by Von Der Leyen (the only name on the ballot, and barely got a majority), is made up of 27 members (previously 28). Those members, by oath of office, are bound to represent the eu as a whole, and not their member state.

Then, when laws are passed by the parliament, it is done more akin to a cattle market auction, rather than a genuine democratic excercise. And as you admit, once passed, it's nigh on impossible to undo.

It was when ex labour leader Neil Kinnock was the eu commissioner for transport in 1998, that they proposed the eu first railway package. Which was what might be called 'enhancement', but more like a clarification, re-codification and empowering of the original eec directive 440/1991 of 1991 (pre tory railway act 1993, pre german rail reform act 1994), which mandated the seperation of train and track, and the creation of a track access charging regime.

So the former Labour leader reconfirmed the groundwork (the first of the four packages) to smash up the state railways. So to be clear, was he acting as a Labour party member? And a UK representative? Or as per his oath, as an eu overlord?
 

Tester

Established Member
Joined
5 Jul 2020
Messages
1,697
Location
Watford
T

The eu commission, currently lead by Von Der Leyen (the only name on the ballot, and barely got a majority), is made up of 27 members (previously 28). Those members, by oath of office, are bound to represent the eu as a whole, and not their member state.

Then, when laws are passed by the parliament, it is done more akin to a cattle market auction, rather than a genuine democratic excercise. And as you admit, once passed, it's nigh on impossible to undo.

It was when ex labour leader Neil Kinnock was the eu commissioner for transport in 1998, that they proposed the eu first railway package. Which was what might be called 'enhancement', but more like a clarification, re-codification and empowering of the original eec directive 440/1991 of 1991 (pre tory railway act 1993, pre german rail reform act 1994), which mandated the seperation of train and track, and the creation of a track access charging regime.

So the former Labour leader reconfirmed the groundwork (the first of the four packages) to smash up the state railways. So to be clear, was he acting as a Labour party member? And a UK representative? Or as per his oath, as an eu overlord?
We understand that you are not a fan of the EU.
 

stuu

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2011
Messages
3,766
I'm not sure which bit of "the EU has no powers other than that which it's members have agreed to give it" is particularly hard to understand. It's a fundamental misunderstanding of what the EU is to assume it can create law by itself.

Last time I looked there were plenty of state railways in the EU. They were only required to account separately for the networks and the operations. When was Deutsche Bahn smashed up?
 

Stossgebet

Member
Joined
3 Oct 2024
Messages
196
Location
Midlands
I'm not sure which bit of "the EU has no powers other than that which it's members have agreed to give it" is particularly hard to understand. It's a fundamental misunderstanding of what the EU is to assume it can create law by itself.

Last time I looked there were plenty of state railways in the EU. They were only required to account separately for the networks and the operations. When was Deutsche Bahn smashed up?
Ah. So there's your key misunderstanding.
You "see plenty of state railways in the eu today".

Well, let me put it to you like this (and taking the eu out of this for a moment). I'm sure you'll understand.

1. Imagine if a tory government proposed breaking up the nhs and tendering the hospitals to the private sector by say the year 2040.
People will be up in arms about the tories privatising the nhs. But nothing has actually happened yet.
2. Fast forwards a bit. The tories then pass the legislation to make it law to tender the nhs hospitals to the private sector. There's more uproar, but at this stage nothing has happened, and of course, the tories are abused for privatising the nhs.
3. The tendering process begins as per the law, and some nhs hospitals are privatised. But not all, because although the legislation is legally binding. It is a process that takes time.
So. At this stage, would you dare to deny that the nhs has been privatised in the basis that "the nhs still exists"?

It's akin to denying that east midlands trains has a new fleet of trains coming to replace meridians, on the basis that you stood at leicester and saw that meridians still exist.

Do not fall into the trap of thinking what you see today, is the final outcome of the legislation. And yes even after the whole process is complete, some state owned train operating undertakings may still exist. But they will not be national operations, and they will all be on the short term franchises/concessions as mandated by the eu fourth railway package. They will be competitively retendered again and again and again and again.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Fragezeichnen

Member
Joined
14 Jun 2021
Messages
436
Location
Somewhere
Yes DB Fernvehker has yet to be broken up and tendered to the private sector. By what law do you think it is exempt? Their are no vetoes against eu single market laws.
There is nothing to tender and no reason to break it up. It is a commercial operation without public subsidy and any privately owned company is free to compete against it.

Do not fall into the trap of thinking what you see today, is the final outcome of the legislation. And yes even after the whole process is complete, some state owned train operating undertakings may still exist. But they will not be national operations, and they will all be on the short term franchises/concessions as mandated by the eu fourth railway package. They will be competitively retendered again and again and again and again.

The process was completed in Germany many years ago. All subsidised train services in Germany have been run on a concession basis for some time. The same goes for example, for the Netherlands. Others like France are some way behind(the legislation allowed a lot of flexibility on the timeline for implementation).



I'm not sure why this thread got sidetracked into European Politics. Neither the CER nor the UIC are EU agencies and the meeting the press release is about was not organised by the EU.

Frankly it seems like a lot of hot air just to get people to write about the meeting. There already is a "single european railway system". The tracks are connected together. There are common standards(RIC/RIV) which enable a vehicle to travel the whole network without modification. There is a common timetable database(MERITS).

What was promised from the EU side in this term are rules requiring operators to provide open access to ticket sales. The CER, which represents primarily large state-owned operators which with their own ticket sales platforms dominate the market in their respective countries, would ideally like to get ahead of this so they can shut out smaller private operators, so that's possibly what they are getting at.
 

StephenHunter

Established Member
Joined
22 Jul 2017
Messages
2,917
Location
London
Frankly it seems like a lot of hot air just to get people to write about the meeting. There already is a "single european railway system". The tracks are connected together. There are common standards(RIC/RIV) which enable a vehicle to travel the whole network without modification. There is a common timetable database(MERITS).
Something that only really applies to loco-hauled carriages and freight wagons; those would still need loco changes at some borders.
 

Gag Halfrunt

Member
Joined
23 Jul 2019
Messages
988
What was promised from the EU side in this term are rules requiring operators to provide open access to ticket sales. The CER, which represents primarily large state-owned operators which with their own ticket sales platforms dominate the market in their respective countries, would ideally like to get ahead of this so they can shut out smaller private operators, so that's possibly what they are getting at.

Jon Worth has entered the conversation.


When Ursula von der Leyen’s released her political guidelines for her second term as President of the European Commission, there it was – a commitment to fix railway ticketing in the EU, including passenger rights:
Cross-border train travel is still too difficult for many citizens. People should be able to use open booking systems to purchase trans-European journeys with several providers, without losing their right to reimbursement or compensatory travel. To this end we will propose a Single Digital Booking and Ticketing Regulation, to ensure that Europeans can buy one single ticket on one single platform and get passengers’ rights for their whole trip.” Ursula von der Leyen, Political Guidelines for the European Commission 18.07.2024 (PDF here)

This was repeated, more or less word for word in her letter to the nominee for European Commissioner for Transport Tzitzikostas:
You will prepare a proposal for a Single Digital Booking and Ticketing Regulation to ensure that Europeans can buy one single ticket on one single platform and benefit from passenger rights protection for their whole trip.” Letter from Ursula von der Leyen to Apostolos Tzitzikostas 17.09.2024 (PDF here)

Tzitzikostas – in his written answers to the European Parliament’s questionnaire prior to the hearings in November, goes further – the draft is expected in 2025:
To further support modal shift and promote cross-border travel, I will put forward a Single Digital Booking and Ticketing Regulation for rail, complementing and improving existing obligations in this area, as well as a multimodal digital mobility services initiative to make it easier for our citizens to opt for more sustainable travel options.” (Page 4) “As explained above, I also intend to launch an initiative to address multimodal ticketing as soon as possible, including through a Single Digital Booking and Ticketing Regulation by the end of 2025, complementing and improving existing obligations in this area, as well as by a multimodal digital mobility services initiative, to make travel options by rail easier to access and to enhance the protection of passengers.” (Page 7), Questionnaire to the Commissioner-designate Apostolos Tzitzikostas Sustainable Transport and Tourism 23.10.2024 (PDF here)

In other words it is now no longer a question of if the European Commission will put forward a draft – it will. It is no longer a question of when, for it will happen in 2025. It is now time to move to how the European Commission proposes to solve the Europe-wide ticketing problem.

In my previous pieces about this – one about the overall motivation for the Commission to act, a further one about why I do not trust the industry to solve this themselves, and a third on why state incumbents like Deutsche Bahn are missing a trick here – I have explained plenty of the background.



So let us begin to examine the how.

Here the wording of von der Leyen’s two texts frustrates me a little: aim for “one single ticket” and I fear this is doomed to fail. Aim for “tickets booked in one single transaction, with passenger rights guaranteed” and success is more likely.

Let us imagine a passenger is making a trip from Nice to Lisboa. They would need a SNCF ticket Nice-Marseille, a Renfe ticket Marseille-Madrid-Badajoz, and a CP ticket Badajoz-Lisboa. There are no alternatives to any of these companies for each leg of this trip at the time of writing. Tickets for all parts of the trip are at least partially yield managed (meaning cheap but inflexible off peak tickets are available).

Try to bundle all of that together into one ticket (also known as a through ticket) is going to be complete hell, administratively. Renfe is incapable of giving a passenger one single ticket if you change from their own long distance onto their own Cercanías local trains within Spain. Ask them to add CP and SNCF and whoever else’s trains into the mix and it is hopeless.

The simpler way in my view is to build on and improve the existing system.

Book a complicated international trip on a site like Trainline or International Bahn today and you do not receive one ticket, but multiple tickets – at least one per operator. For the Nice-Lisboa example above, a passenger would receive at least 4 tickets, but these would be booked in one transaction.

The problem is missing passenger rights currently. Were – say – my Madrid-Badajoz Renfe train to break down, leaving me stranded in Badajoz because the CP Badajoz-Entroncamento-Lisboa had already departed, I would have to foot the costs for a night in a hotel on my own. The solution would be a guaranteed compensation system. Regardless of how many tickets I have, and regardless of operators, I would not be left out of pocket as a passenger – providing I had respected the minimum stipulated connecting times. The existing Agreement on Journey Continuation – and informal agreement between railway firms that is fiendishly complicated to use – would need to be simplified and given legal teeth to make this work, and the law would apply to both state owned and private operators.

So the first question to Tzitzikostas – does he want to insist on one single ticket, or are multiple tickets with a guaranteed passenger rights system a better way?



Then comes the question of who should sell the ticket.

Von der Leyen’s text stating booking should be “on one single platform” is a possible cause for confusion, although her July text also mentions “open booking systems” (note the plural).

The reason at the moment that no-one – neither a state owned railway company nor a private third party platform like Trainline – can sell Nice-Lisboa is that no one other than CP themselves has full access to CP’s ticketing inventory. Even Renfe, the state rail company in neighbouring Spain, cannot sell a Badajoz (the border station)-Lisboa ticket, even though Badajoz is actually on Spanish territory.

Railway companies sharing data with their immediate neighbours is no solution – because that does not cover three or four country trips (more common in central Europe than in south west Europe I admit!). Railway companies sharing data with one central EU mandated platform is an excessively centralised answer – we do not need one centrally mandated platform for air tickets, so I do not see why we need one for rail.

As I see it, the solution here is to mandate all railway companies, whether state or private, to make their entire ticketing inventory available to third parties – with no exceptions. A platform selling any such tickets would then also be entitled to a commission from the sale to cover their costs. This might then mean I can buy a Nice-Lisboa from SNCF, from Renfe, from Trainline or even from Deutsche Bahn – as a customer I would have a choice of plaforms from which I could book.

So the second question to Tzitzikostas – does he want to see one single platform for rail ticket sales, or multiple platforms?



Beyond these two central questions there are a whole bunch of further details the Commission is going to have to tackle, such as how to apply FRAND principles and police them, how a compensation system between railway companies should be structured (as some rail firms will cause more delays for their neighbours than others), and whether one or more than one technical standard for exchange of ticketing data make sense (many state owned railways are insisting on OSDM as the standard, but the EU Agency for Railways is sceptical). But all of these issues flow from the answers to the two core questions.

So put 18:30 CET on 4th November in your calendars, and follow the live stream of the hearing here – and let’s start to get some answers as to how this ticketing reform is going to look.
 

30907

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Sep 2012
Messages
21,950
Location
Airedale
Something that only really applies to loco-hauled carriages and freight wagons; those would still need loco changes at some borders.
...but that is rapidly decreasing as multi-voltage locos/units with multi-national capability come on stream.
 

DJ_K666

Member
Joined
5 May 2009
Messages
918
Location
Way too far north of 75A
Well, if you're pro open access operator then I guess the EU has been a wonderful thing (I'm not).

On the other hand there have been problems with operators not wanting to go to the extra hassle of running marginal services across borders, and of course there was the incident in Lithuania where they actually lifted track to block an international freight route!
Would that be the Russia/Kaliningrad business?
 

Gag Halfrunt

Member
Joined
23 Jul 2019
Messages
988
No. Lithuanian Railways lifted a line to the border with Latvia and were fined €28 million by the European Commission in 2017.


 

dutchflyer

Established Member
Joined
17 Oct 2013
Messages
1,550
And as for UIC being the general accepted cooperation: just read in the german DSO forum that VR=Finnish (state) railways are planning to step out of it. Details as such to be confirmed.
 

rf_ioliver

Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
1,027
And as for UIC being the general accepted cooperation: just read in the german DSO forum that VR=Finnish (state) railways are planning to step out of it. Details as such to be confirmed.
Seems to, effective 1st January 2025. The reasons are everything from cost to "UIC acting like H*****" according to the various discussion boards. As with many things here, lots of politics and a belief that "everything was better before" ....
 

Gag Halfrunt

Member
Joined
23 Jul 2019
Messages
988
Jon Worth has written another blog post about cross-border ticketing.


French state owned rail operator SNCF will not sell me tickets for Italian state owned rail operator Trenitalia’s trains.

Trenitalia will not sell me tickets for SNCF’s trains.

But in Brussels both Trenitalia and SNCF want to have you believe that a rail industry initiative called the CER Ticketing Roadmap will mean that from 2025 rail passengers will be better able to book rail tickets Europe wide. The solution the Roadmap proposes is a single standard for data exchange – OSDM (Open Sales and Distribution Model) – and that is meant to solve the problems customers face.

Except it will not.

Trenitalia could sell SNCF’s tickets right now, and SNCF could sell Trenitalia’s (and indeed both used to!)

The reason they do not do so is not technical but political – they do not want to, and there is no obligation on them to do so, so they don’t.

No technical standard – OSDM or any other – is going to fix that.

My aim is simple – it is to allow passengers to book tickets across Europe by train seamlessly and easily. Easier booking should mean more passengers, and hence fewer passengers on other more polluting modes like cars and planes. And it should help railways’ bottom line as well.

I do not care if SNCF or Trenitalia, or Deutsche Bahn or Trainline or Rail Europe or someone else can offer this seamless ticket selling service to me, but I need at least one platform (and ideally more than one!) with all of Europe’s trains for sale on it. The only way to achieve this is to introduce a data sharing obligation on all rail operators. Whether large or small, state or private, an operator’s entire ticketing inventory must be shared with anyone who wants it, and on fair terms to allow that reseller to make a small profit from the sale.

The CER Ticketing Roadmap and OSDM do not include any such data sharing obligation, and so do not solve the problem.

And then even if I could manage to purchase a Berlin-Barcelona or a Nice-Lisboa trip in one transaction, as a customer at the moment I do not have full passenger rights, because my trip would be with multiple operators. Industry initiatives like AJC and Railteam are not rights – they are based on the good will of railway companies towards their passengers, and are fiendishly hard to use. If my trip by train is already longer and more costly than on other modes, and I face the danger of being stranded and out of pocket for a hotel night if something goes wrong, that’s a hell of a hard sell to persuade a possible new customer!

No industry initiative is going to help enough on this point either.

This is why nothing short of a new legal framework EU-wide is going to help. And we might just get a proposal for that in 2025.

If you do not understand these basic points by now you are either ignorant, or you are an industry apologist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top