Though the original directive was seen by some as a law bringing about privatisation of the railways, there are no requirements in the legislation requiring any level of privatisation. The main aim of the process was the "de-monopolisation" of European railways, with the aim of increasing competitiveness, a process referred to as 'liberalisation'. There has also been a large increase in the number of private freight providers, many relatively small such as
Rail4chem and
ERS Railways, but the national companies still control the majority of the traffic.
Deutsche Bahn has expanded considerably in the rail freight market, with the purchase of the freight section of the Dutch railway company
NS (now DB Schenker Rail Nederland),
EWS (UK), and DSB goods (Denmark) amongst others. The French state rail company SNCF also expanded through acquisitions, raising the possibility of trans-national virtual monopolies on rail freight replacing former national monopolies, or a potential
duopoly between SNCF and Deutsche Bahn in most of western Europe. A subsidiary of the British company
DB Schenker Rail (UK),
EuroCargoRail, operates trains in France and Spain, a situation unlikely prior to the liberalisation. The increase in cross-border traffic has fuelled demand for multiple voltage electric locomotives such as Bombardier's
TRAXX, Siemens's
Eurosprinter and electric versions of Alstom's
Prima locomotives series. In passenger transport, large transport corporations have been created, or expanded into the rail market from other related activities such as
FirstGroup,
Veolia,
Serco and
Arriva. In the UK, the directives have been criticised in some areas partly based on the problems with the full privatisation of
British Rail, additionally the Trotskyites have claimed that the regulations favour competitive practice which are not necessarily compatible with workers rights.
Implementation In the years following the introduction of the mandates different countries implemented them to different extents and at different paces. By 2004, some countries such as the United Kingdom had gone far beyond the original remit privatising the railway system on
Great Britain (but not
Northern Ireland), others such as Finland and France had created fully separate infrastructure and railway companies from the state-run enterprises; still others, such as Germany, had created separate subsidiaries for different service providers and subsidiaries for infrastructure and track (
DB Netz). Yet others merely separated accounting between the two organisational sections. Most countries in the EU still have a state-owned infrastructure company, but many have privatised part or all of their service providers, or are working towards privatisation. In June 2010, the European Commission instigated legal proceedings through the European Court of Justice against 13 states that had not fully implemented the set of directives (known as the 'first railway package'). The countries not having fully implemented the legislation to the commission's satisfaction were Austria, Czech Republic, Germany, Greece, France, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain. In 2012 action against Germany and Austria on the basis that their infrastructure and operating companies were insufficiently separate was rejected by the
European Court of Justice. Portugal, Spain and Hungary remained as having not yet fully complied with the aspects of the directives. Legal action against Bulgaria was passed to the Court of Justice in 2012 for non-implementation. In February 2013 the European Court of Justice ruled that the governments of Hungary and Spain had failed to liberalise their railways; infrastructure management was not sufficiently separated from train operation. Ireland
derogated its obligation to implement the legislation; until 2012
Iarnród Éireann train operations and infrastructure businesses remained unsplit, and a similar situation existed in Northern Ireland. ==See also==