Competition Report 2006 - Deutsche Bahn AG

More documents

Recommendations

Info

As benchmarks for an effi cient regulatory body, the study used a number of bestpractice criteria. These are based on generally accepted principles such as independence, expertise, responsibility and adequate legal resources for enforcing decisions. In addition, it also took into account practical empirical values, such as a transparent, objective working method, competent employees and, not least, the extent to which the authority regards itself as a customer-friendly service provider, which is easy to contact and which publishes reports on its decisions and methods of operation. Correlation between market opening and regulation model The study revealed three typical organisational forms. In the “Ministry” model, the regulatory body is not a separate entity. Instead, the Ministry of Transport relies on a committee which meets as necessary to advise on regulatory issues. Twelve of the countries investigated belong to this category and thus satisfy only the minimum legal requirements. Seven countries can be allocated to the “Railway Offi ce” model, in which the regulatory tasks have been entrusted to a conventional authority which otherwise deals with technical and safety-relevant aspects. Only six countries have a separate regulatory authority staff ed with specialists Eff ective regulatory bodies where market opening is advanced The progress made in liberalisation of the rail markets is refl ected in the design of the regulatory bodies. Degree of Liberalisation 2004 On Schedule Delayed Pending Departure Rail Regulation Models 2006 Separate Regulatory Authority National Railway Offi ce Ministry Source: Comparison of the regulation of access to rail infrastructure in EU 25, Switzerland and Norway, IBM Business Consulting Services 2006 Market and Competition 7
8 who have the power to make decisions. Of that group, the IBM study concludes that Germany, Austria and the UK comply most closely with the best-practice principles. These are simultaneously the countries which already have signifi cant practical experience of rail regulation. A comparison of these fi ndings with the Rail Liberalisation Index 2004 shows that those states in which market opening is well advanced have also given their regulatory bodies particularly strong powers. The number of confl icts in those countries is by no means a sign of poorly functioning competition; on the contrary, it is proof of the dynamic market development. Conversely, other countries have only a few or even no cases of confl ict simply because in some, market access is not at all possible – so that no confl icts can arise. Most of these states have opted for a “weak” regulation model which is unlikely to bring about any change in that situation, as it does not off er a point of contact for potential newcomers. Particularly strict regulation in Germany Germany’s leading position in Europe in terms of the regulation intensity of the rail sector is proven: on the one hand, the German legislator has vested the regulatory authority with considerable powers of intervention based on the amendment of AEG and EIBV, which in some cases far surpass the EU requirements. On the other hand, on assuming its new duties, the Federal Network Agency profi ted from the fact that German rail infrastructure began to be opened up as part of the rail reform back in 1994. Many employees of the Federal Railway Offi ce, which was initially responsible, have transferred to the new regulator, which thus has recourse to well developed structures and practical experience. The Network Agency can also draw on its own experience of regulating other sectors (telecommunications, post, energy). Although the regulation methods used in those sectors can only be applied to rail to a limited extent, certain market liberalisa tion patterns nevertheless exhibit clear parallels. Regulatory authority has to proceed judiciously The specifi c experience acquired in other network industries is evident in the survey: the railway undertakings confi rm that the German regulatory authority is easily accessible and has reliable communication structures. Its working methods and decisions are regarded as transparent. Other positive comments are that the Agency is run in accordance with corporate governance regulations and provides regular information about its decisions and pending procedures. However, whether the quality – which was not assessed in the study – of the regulation decisions based on the new legislation confi rm these positive impressions will not become apparent until several months have elapsed. In view of the far-reaching legal powers vested in the Agency, the risk of over-regulation in par ticular has to be avoided, as that would ultimately harm the entire market. Initial experience gives reason to hope that the Federal Network Agency will take a pragmatic approach and use the resources at its disposal judiciously.
Page 1 and 2: Deutsche Bahn AG Communications Pot
Page 3 and 4: 2 Impressum Published by Deutsche B
Page 5 and 6: 4 Dynamic Developments in an Attrac
Page 7: 6 Keen competition and the trend to
Page 11 and 12: 10 The attractiveness of the German
Page 13 and 14: 12 Del dit loreet ametum etum quipi
Page 15 and 16: 14 More and more passengers use Deu
Page 17 and 18: 16 The high number of operators ind
Page 19 and 20: 18 Market share of other railways i
Page 21 and 22: 20 Unresolved legal issues and a di
Page 23 and 24: 22 Fair framework conditions are vi
Page 25 and 26: 24 performance, while the fi gure f
Page 27 and 28: 26 By using all the diff erent tran
Page 29 and 30: 28 In Dialogue with a Scientifi c E
Page 31 and 32: 30 Joachim Fried, born 1948, is a f
Page 33 and 34: 32 Equal Rules for Opening the Tran
Page 35 and 36: 34 The unequal treatment of the dif
Page 37 and 38: 36 New national regulatory framewor
Page 39 and 40: 38 The position of the infrastructu
Page 41 and 42: 40 EBA proceedings in the year 2005
Page 43 and 44: 42 Cartel Offi ce has its sights on
Page 45 and 46: 44 Movement in the Euro pean Rail M
Page 47 and 48: 46 The excellent economic developme
Page 49 and 50: 48 Train path pricing in the EU Mem
Page 51 and 52: 50 Important new-build lines will b
Page 53 and 54: 52 EU initiative for public transpo
Page 55 and 56: 54 Company L R F M Shareholder Comp
Page 57 and 58: 56 Company L R F M Shareholder VTG
Page 59 and 60:
58 Company L R F M Shareholder Muni
Page 61:
60 Company L R F M Shareholder Rint
show all

Competition Report 2006 - Deutsche Bahn AG

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?