And there they were again, on Tuesday evening during the debate in the House of Representatives about the rush hour tax on the train. The teacher, the police officer and the nurse. They have to travel during the overcrowded rush hour, because their working day starts promptly at 9:00 am. Commuting is necessary, because they can no longer afford housing in the expensive big city. They are not reimbursed for travel expenses by their employer.
According to MPs, they were the favorite ‘victims’ of the rush hour tax that opponents of more expensive train tickets regularly raised during the morning rush hour. MPs also mentioned these examples again in Tuesday’s debate about the future of Dutch rail.
It remained unclear exactly how many teachers, police officers and healthcare workers would be affected by the price increases on the train. NS kept it at a few percent, while most travelers would actually find it cheaper with a new fare system, according to the railway company.
‘Hot air’
Good news for those potentially affected on Tuesday evening after the parliamentary debate: the rush hour surcharge, also known as a crowd charge or rate differentiation, will not be introduced (for the time being). Only D66 was still adamant, the rest of the parties spoke out against the rush hour tax.
At the end of the debate, State Secretary Vivianne Heijnen (Infrastructure and Water Management, CDA) promised that “no new tariff system will be introduced before 2026”. Now that period was known earlier – NS would not be able to introduce the new fare system earlier anyway – but Heijnen tried to accommodate the House somewhat.
Also read: There are alternatives to the criticized NS rush hour charge
She also stated (again) that the new tariff system would “not be introduced without the consent of the House of Representatives”. The State Secretary promises to include this in the contract for the main rail network, the most important intercity trains and local trains in the Netherlands, with NS. Heijnen wants to sign this ‘main rail network concession’, which runs from 2025 to 2033, before the end of this year.
The State Secretary will ask NS to make new plans to spread the crowds during rush hour. In the morning around half past eight, the train is overcrowded on many routes, while the rest of the time only “warm air” is transported, as NS CEO Wouter Koolmees calls it. And that is becoming more and more expensive, NS warns. The railway company says it then has to deploy more and more equipment and personnel for only a small part of the day.
A ‘rush hour surcharge’, as Heijnen already called it in the letter to Parliament about the main rail network contract of April 2023, no longer has a political chance. But the State Secretary does not appear to have completely renounced the possibility of making the price of train tickets depend on location, time and route in a different way (‘fare differentiation’).
Fundamental debate
The discussion about the rush hour surcharge took up a large part of Tuesday evening. And so, as was feared, that controversial theme distracted from a more fundamental debate about the future of the railways.
How public transport remains affordable for everyone in the Netherlands – in the Randstad and in ‘the region’, during rush hour or off-peak hours, whether you travel with the NS intercity, the Arriva local train or the Qbuzz bus – was a question that received little or no answer.
It is clear that the current outgoing cabinet no longer has the money for grand public transport ambitions. The House itself must find financial cover for additional intercity services to Zwolle, Groningen and Leeuwarden, as some factions want. This also applies to a ‘climate ticket’, a public transport subscription for 49 euros per month based on German, Austrian and French examples. GroenLinks-PvdA, for example, believes this is an ideal way to introduce people (renewed) to the train. And perhaps an even better way to make better use of the train in the future.
In the Netherlands, the 2024 timetable remains leading in the contract for the main rail network: train services will only be added if the infrastructure can cope and if there are sufficient travelers. Not before, and not in response to population growth. The House lacks ambition in the current contract between NS and the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management. A point that travelers association Rover and rail manager ProRail also made earlier.
Despite Heijnen’s promise that the House has the final say if NS wants to introduce a new tariff system, the State Secretary grants NS the authority to increase the rates annually. Critics would have liked to see Heijnen take this tariff authority back into government hands.
European objections
One fundamental difference with public transport debates of a few years ago became visible on Tuesday: the broad call for more market forces on the railways, more opportunities for NS’s competitors, has died down. Only the VVD still adheres to the liberalization of the rail market.
In the run-up to Tuesday’s train debate, carrier Arriva, a subsidiary of the German state rail company Deutsche Bahn, once again took issue. Arriva reported that the company wants to take over many more train connections from NS.
State Secretary Heijnen does not like that, she said during the debate. “I cannot now leave the coherent domestic rail network, one of the busiest networks in Europe, to the market. This is not the time to experiment.” Heijnen does not want to upset anything now that public transport has not yet recovered from the corona crisis and passenger numbers are still below 2019 levels.
The European Commission has a different opinion: according to European agreements, which the Netherlands has also made, a major rail contract such as the Dutch main rail network must be put out to tender to a certain extent. The Commission has started a formal notice against the Netherlands. Only Derk-Jan Eppink (BBB) addressed this during the debate; Heijnen dismissed the European objections, even though the procedure could end up before the European Court. There, the private award of the main rail network to NS could be found unlawful.
In The Hague, Heijnen will now include the wishes of the House, in particular the objections to the rush hour surcharge, in the contract to be signed with NS. At the beginning of next week, the House will again (briefly) debate the railway. Then GroenLinks-PvdA, among others, will submit motions for a climate ticket and for more trains to the Northern Netherlands.
The following week, the House will then vote on the motions. About minor repairs to the NS contract. Not about the fundamental choices for Dutch public transport that must bring police officers, teachers and nurses to work quickly, reliably, sustainably and affordably in the future.