1 ERFA Annual Event Brussels, Welcome. Irmtraut Tonndorf ERFA Chair

Trains of the future? 2

3 International freight trains today: loss of time, money, and market confidence

Rail Freight Corridors with Directive 913/2010: Important steps, but still a long way to go 4 Field of regulation 913/2010Current status Designation of freight corridors (Articles 3 to 5) Corridors are defined and stable Consultation of applicants (Article 10) Has not yet taken place  Investment planning (Article 11) Better international cooperation and view of corridor requirements, but implementation is often lacking  Coordination of works (Article 12) Planned works are published, but “corridor effects” are not sufficiently taken account of.  One-Stop Shop (Article 13) Corridor One-Stop Shops are in place, but their powers and added value leave room for improvement  Capacity allocation (Article 14) PaPs, FlexPaPs and reserved capacity ensure capacity for freight trains, but result is still suboptimal for all partners  Traffic management (Article 16) Different approaches in different countries, no coordinated “corridor view”  Traffic management in case of disturbance (A. 17) Different approaches in different countries, no coordinated “corridor view”  Conditions of use (Article 18) Available, but not fully harmonised  Quality of service (Article 19) Lack of monitoring; no satisfying data 

5 Strengthen corridors – revision of regulation is needed! Role and leadership of the Executive Board must be strengthened Regulation for train paths does not meet market requirements Decision making often allocated outside of the Corridors (ministeries, NSAs etc.) Changes do not only affect the Corridors but the whole country > reluctance of MS/IMs to change rules Member States are interested: > more in passengers ( less in freight (> 50% international) Customers – the driving force !! – are excluded from decision making

Executive Board: Transport Ministeries A, B, C, D, E Management Board: Infrastructure Managers A, B, C, D, E Country A Railway Undertaking Advisory Group Terminal Advisory Group 6 Rail Freight Corridors today Country BCountry CCountry DCountry E Construction – Planning – Operations coordinate / steer / improve

> Availability of market oriented infrastructure > End-to-end journey time > End-to-end punctuality > Infra cost for typical freight trains > Customer satisfaction Executive Board: Transport Ministeries A, B, C, D, E Chaired by EU coordinator Goals & Action plan Management Board: Infrastructure Managers A, B, C, D, E Country A Railway Undertaking Advisory Group Terminal Advisory Group 7 Our vision: empowered Rail Freight Corridors Country BCountry CCountry DCountry E Annual strategy meeting for all stakeholders Funding for quick wins Construction – Planning – Operations PAPs ? ERTMS ? coordinate / steer / improve

4° Railway Package – results below expectations  Some very timid steps forward  No independent, neutral, fully empowered Infrastructure Manager  Limited coordination between rail users with their Infrastructure Manager  No guarantees against cross-subsidisation  Very limited improvement in market opening of the passenger sector and much legal uncertainty Therefore:  ERFA to work more closely with key authorities, competition authorities and rail regulatory bodies, ensuring they use their powers to intervene in favour of a competitive market  ERFA to monitor implementation of existing rail legislation that should be in force since June 2015  ERFA to strengthen the broad alliance of rail customers, shippers, operators, suppliers, who all favour transparency, non-discrimination and competition 8

Recast Directive: price efficiency and transparency Too much opaqueness in the calculation of charges> Transparency! Every Member State has its own calculation method> Consistency! Poor infrastructure management  high marginal cost> Efficiency!  Member States to promote transparency, consistency and efficiency  IMs must reduce costs of infrastructure and level of access charges  Strengthened role of Regulatory Bodies in monitoring charges Today

We need to invest in quality. 10 Common investment strategy  No finger pointing, but transparency and analysis of reasons  Review of operational rules for long distance cross border trains  RU compensation for planned disruptions on the network  Accountability: fair performance schemes (bonus/malus)  Investments with the aim to stabilise the timetable; quick wins Bad quality Waste of ressources Additional cost Loss of revenue and margin No investment

Thank you. 11