Representatives of the industry and interest groups had until 24 February 2023 to comment on the consultation draft entitled «Improving the framework conditions for freight transport in Switzerland». The LITRA, UTP, CI TCNA, ASTAG and VAP have jointly submitted their views (blog Rail freight transport in the territory: the industry develops a joint solution). Here is a summary of the key elements of the responses from other stakeholders.
The issues at stake:
- Abandoning wagonload traffic (TWCI) would be fatal.
- Funding must not maintain the status quo.
- Digital Automatic Coupling (DAC) and the data platform must be promoted.
- Non-discriminatory access to the market must remain possible.
- Innovative approaches at organisational level, cooperation between players
- Focus on customer benefit.
The Federal Council invited industry representatives and political parties to submit their views on the consultation project entitled “Improving the framework conditions for freight transport in Switzerland” by 24 February 2023. Many responses were received. Below we compare the statements of the representatives of certain interest groups and draw a conclusion. The Federal Council will incorporate the feedback into its message to Parliament in a second step.
Do not abandon the TWCI
With the exception of the SVP, the responses were in favour of variant 1, a further development of V1 or a completely new variant. The respondents consider the abandonment of the TWCI to be fatal. They fear the loss of security of supply, capacity shortages on the road, additional work and expense in logistics and greater efforts to meet climate compatibility.
Do not maintain the status quo through funding
Many respondents agreed with partial funding as proposed. Several responses suggested that funding should be from existing funds – preferably from the IFF – rather than from new credit. However, several respondents expressed concern that the funding is underestimated and therefore serves at most to maintain the current state. They therefore call for an increase in funding that will achieve the modal split change they are aiming for. There is a consensus that the funding should allow for modernisation and customer orientation, so as to ensure financial autonomy in the future.
Advancing digitalisation and automation
A majority is in favour of modernising rail freight transport by means of the CPD. They approve of federal funding in the form of time-limited financing until the DAC is completed.
According to the majority of responses, digitalisation also includes the interconnection of freely accessible data platforms and the simplification of cooperation between market players that goes with it.
Preserving a non-discriminatory market economy
Some voices call for a transfer mandate for freight transport, others insist on a free choice of means of transport in domestic traffic. On the whole, respondents want non-discriminatory support for different types of traffic and modes of transport. The free market economy must be preserved. Innovative approaches at the organisational level and cooperation between market players will make TFM more attractive to customers.
Preventing distortions of competition in the TWCI
The majority did not support SBB Cargo as a monopoly in the TWCI. The respondents propose adjustments to prevent distortions of competition, such as organisational and financial separation of the TWCI from the block train and cooperation between the market players.
Improving customer benefit
A need mentioned by several interviewees is that the overall design should systematically focus on improving customer benefit. This includes sufficient and properly allocated infrastructure capacity and an appropriate market system that promotes innovation and attractive offers. With regard to train path prices, the respondents would like to see a reduction – for example, on a European scale.
An underestimation of the need for action
The many responses highlight one thing: the need for action in rail freight transport is much greater than the Federal Council has shown. The two alternative solutions merely offer a choice between two lesser evils instead of a comprehensive solution. In order to have a factual debate on the financing alternatives, the respondents would like to receive clear facts about SBB Cargo’s finances.
The overwhelming majority of respondents deplored the fact that there was no coherent overview, rather than just the TFM and shipping. They cited the HVF and the forthcoming revision of the Federal Act on a Heavy Vehicle Fee (HVF), as well as the Federal Act on Mobility Data Infrastructure (MVDI).
The DETEC evaluation is published here: https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/dl/proj/2022/69/cons_1
