file: greening freight package

EU Member States are not satisfied with the Greening Freight Package

Image: Shutterstock. Carlo Emanuele Barbi

A few EU Member States showed some dissatisfaction with the recent developments regarding the Greening Freight Package. Germany, France, Austria and the Netherlands were not happy with the definition of Combined Transport. Moreover, Sweden does not seem to satisfied with the Capacity Management Regulation as it abstained from voting on Council proposal during the EU Committee of Permanent Representatives (COREPER).

The four countries disagreeing with the definition of Combined Transport as included in the Combined Transport Directive of the GFP said it should be based on distance, as Agence Europe mentioned. Instead, the current one says that the combined transport label applies to “intermodal transport operation shall reduce by at least 40% external costs compared to an alternative road unimodal transport operation”. This definition, the countries argued, is complicated and not easy to control.

In step in what the four countries consider the right direction was the proposal by the Belgian Presidency to limit the road leg to 50 per cent. In other words, if a more than half the distance of an intermodal service is carried out on the road, it would not qualify as combined transport. However, this is still not enough. The four countries also had some criticism for the eFTI platforms, which they consider more of a barrier than a facilitator.

Sweden and the Rail Management Capacity

The Scandinavian country was the only one abstaining from voting on the EU Council proposal for the Capcity Management Regulation at the COREPER, industry sources told RailFreight.com. “They are not happy with several aspects, such as the dominance of national strategies. But they were unable to make partners in Coreper.”, the sources added.

Initially, the Regulation was regarded as one of the most beneficial pieces of the GFP for rail freight. Its main points aimed at reducing the power of Infrastructure Managers and making the lives of Railway Undertakings easier. However, it has been under the spotlight since it reached the EU Council, which seems to be willing to make changes that might hinder the industry.

Also read:

You just read one of our premium articles free of charge

Want full access? Take advantage of our exclusive offer

See the offer

Author: Marco Raimondi

Marco Raimondi is an editor of RailFreight.com, the online magazine for rail freight professionals.

Add your comment

characters remaining.

Log in through one of the following social media partners to comment.

EU Member States are not satisfied with the Greening Freight Package | RailFreight.com
file: greening freight package

EU Member States are not satisfied with the Greening Freight Package

Image: Shutterstock. Carlo Emanuele Barbi

A few EU Member States showed some dissatisfaction with the recent developments regarding the Greening Freight Package. Germany, France, Austria and the Netherlands were not happy with the definition of Combined Transport. Moreover, Sweden does not seem to satisfied with the Capacity Management Regulation as it abstained from voting on Council proposal during the EU Committee of Permanent Representatives (COREPER).

The four countries disagreeing with the definition of Combined Transport as included in the Combined Transport Directive of the GFP said it should be based on distance, as Agence Europe mentioned. Instead, the current one says that the combined transport label applies to “intermodal transport operation shall reduce by at least 40% external costs compared to an alternative road unimodal transport operation”. This definition, the countries argued, is complicated and not easy to control.

In step in what the four countries consider the right direction was the proposal by the Belgian Presidency to limit the road leg to 50 per cent. In other words, if a more than half the distance of an intermodal service is carried out on the road, it would not qualify as combined transport. However, this is still not enough. The four countries also had some criticism for the eFTI platforms, which they consider more of a barrier than a facilitator.

Sweden and the Rail Management Capacity

The Scandinavian country was the only one abstaining from voting on the EU Council proposal for the Capcity Management Regulation at the COREPER, industry sources told RailFreight.com. “They are not happy with several aspects, such as the dominance of national strategies. But they were unable to make partners in Coreper.”, the sources added.

Initially, the Regulation was regarded as one of the most beneficial pieces of the GFP for rail freight. Its main points aimed at reducing the power of Infrastructure Managers and making the lives of Railway Undertakings easier. However, it has been under the spotlight since it reached the EU Council, which seems to be willing to make changes that might hinder the industry.

Also read:

You just read one of our premium articles free of charge

Want full access? Take advantage of our exclusive offer

See the offer

Author: Marco Raimondi

Marco Raimondi is an editor of RailFreight.com, the online magazine for rail freight professionals.

Add your comment

characters remaining.

Log in through one of the following social media partners to comment.