by
How do we process your data?
We use cookies to improve your browsing experience and personalize our content. They are mainly used for statistical purposes.
Why does the “European rail network” look so promising on paper, yet in practice regularly confront us with impossible-to-find tickets, absurd connections and disappearing night trains? Deep down, we all feel it: there is a clear gap between political promises, budgetary realities, market logics and passengers’ expectations.
To understand what is really going on, we decided to go straight to where decisions are made: the European Parlia Je t’offre un rail? (the podcast that will make you addicted to trains), Benjamin handed the microphone to François Kalfon, French socialist Member of the European Parliament, member of the Transport Committee and daily rail user.
So, is Europe really up to the challenge? No sugar-coating, just straight answers.
On paper, the European rail network is a dream: a continent connected by smooth, fast and interoperable trains. In reality, François Kalfon paints a far more nuanced picture. Today, rail networks remain largely national, with different rules, standards and technical constraints from one country to another.
This affects everything from axle loads and infrastructure to signalling systems and regulations. The result? Running a train from one country to another can be far more complicated than it should be.
“There is no real Europe of rail.” – François Kalfon
Behind this blunt statement lies a massive challenge: as long as technical harmonisation is incomplete, European rail will remain a patchwork rather than a truly integrated network.
For François Kalfon, this is precisely where the European Union must play its role: to unify.
Unifying standards, rules and constraints to allow trains to run seamlessly across borders. It is deep, highly technical work, often invisible — but absolutely essential.
“Making sure axle loads are the same, that infrastructure constraints are the same, that regulations move forward…”, explains the MEP.
He is clear: this work is far from finished. Europe is moving forward, but not always at a pace that matches the climate emergency or passengers’ expectations.
When asked directly, François Kalfon does not beat around the bush. In his view, European support for rail is insufficient given what is at stake.
“Europe is not doing enough for the development of rail.” – François Kalfon
Why? Because rail carries a huge share of incompressible costs (infrastructure, maintenance, modernisation), while aviation still benefits from a very favourable tax framework. The result is obvious to everyone: trains are often more expensive than planes, even on routes where rail should be the obvious choice.
In his view, the logic should be reversed: the most polluting modes should contribute more to finance the cleanest ones. As long as this imbalance persists, rail will start the race with a structural handicap.
Night trains embody everything we love about European rail: crossing countries, linking capitals, travelling low-carbon while you sleep. And yet, they are often the first services to be threatened when funding is lacking.
François Kalfon highlights a paradox many travellers know all too well: night trains are slower — and often much more expensive than flying. In these conditions, it is hard to make them a cornerstone of the transition.
“We are ready to take more time, but it costs two, three, five times more than flying.” – François Kalfon
He argues that these cross-border lines should be supported at European level, rather than relying solely on national budgets. He also explains that he has directly challenged the European Commission on this issue, particularly regarding the Paris–Vienna line (discontinued in December 2025).
Behind the issue of night trains lies a broader political question: does Europe truly see rail as a strategic infrastructure for the ecological transition?
François Kalfon is keen to defend SNCF, but he also points to the heavy constraints weighing on it. The French state has taken over part of the debt, but in return requires that profits be used almost exclusively to regenerate the network.
In other words: rail is expected to be competitive, attractive and affordable… while carrying a massive financial burden.
“If you take a racehorse and put bags of cement on its back, you can’t expect it to run fast.” – François Kalfon
As long as this model is not rethought, he believes it will be very difficult to sustainably lower prices without finding other sources of funding.
If you want to go further, we invite you to explore our articles dedicated to the issue of train pricing.
On paper, passenger rights exist. In practice, as soon as you combine several operators or cross a border, everything becomes complicated: who do you contact if there is a problem? Who refunds you? Who is responsible?
François Kalfon acknowledges that the system is currently too unclear and that this discourages many travellers. He also announces that legislation is being prepared in the European Parliament to clarify responsibilities and make journeys smoother.
“We don’t even know who to turn to.” – François Kalfon
For him, it is obvious: as long as ticketing remains a headache, rail will never compete with the perceived simplicity of flying.
Another point he considers crucial: access to information. If train tickets are not visible on all platforms, if some offers remain “hidden”, travellers will not choose them.
François Kalfon insists that the entire rail offer must be accessible everywhere, including on dominant platforms. He also recalls that some international routes were not even integrated into traditional sales channels, which severely limited their success.
For him, the battle for rail is also fought on screens: “The offer has to be present on all platforms.”
Opening the market to competition was supposed to lower prices. In some cases, this is not what he observes — particularly on the Paris–Lyon–Marseille axis.
François Kalfon does not reject dynamic pricing, but he believes it must be strictly regulated. Excessive price gaps are, in his view, incompatible with the notion of public service and end up excluding part of the population.
“I would support a ratio of 1 to 3, 1 to 4 maximum.” – François Kalfon
Beyond that, he argues, we move away from the idea of mobility accessible to all.
Finally, he points to a very operational problem: the lack of rolling stock. Some trains are ageing, deliveries are delayed, and demand is rising. In these conditions, increasing supply and lowering prices becomes extremely difficult.
“On Paris–Brussels, you have very old rolling stock, more than 30 years old.” – François Kalfon
Added to this is an often underestimated issue: human resources. Rail is lacking drivers, technicians and engineers. Without skills, there are no trains. And without trains, there is no modal shift.
In a nutshell : one conclusion clearly emerges from the discussion. European rail has enormous potential, but it is still held back by political choices, fiscal imbalances, technical inertia and market logics. Fragmented networks, fragile night trains, high prices, complex ticketing, lack of rolling stock… Europe is moving forward, yes. But not yet at the level required by the climate emergency.
And if there is one strong idea to retain from François Kalfon, it is this:
the future of rail will not be decided by speeches alone, but by very concrete decisions — and in particular, by the price paid by travellers.
Issue du monde de la communication et des médias, Sophie est Responsable éditoriale chez HOURRAIL ! depuis août 2024. Elle est notamment derrière le contenu éditorial du site ainsi que La Locomissive (de l'inspiration voyage bas carbone et des bons plans, un jeudi sur deux, gratuitement dans ta boîte mail !).
Convaincue que les changements d’habitude passent par la transformation de nos imaginaires, elle s’attache à montrer qu’il est possible de voyager autrement, de manière plus consciente, plus lente et plus joyeuse. Son objectif : rendre le slow travel accessible à toutes et tous, à travers des astuces, des décryptages et surtout, de nouveaux récits.
