The Transfer of Rodalies to the Generalitat Raises Risks of Territorial Inequality
The process for the Generalitat of Catalonia to manage Rodalies is moving forward, but deep doubts are emerging about how it will affect the territory. 🚆 The core of the problem lies in how the funds will be distributed, an aspect that could fragment the network if not defined clearly and equitably.
Funding as the Axis of Potential Conflict
The agreement stipulates that the central government must provide the resources to operate and invest, while the Generalitat handles administration. However, there is no detailed protocol to ensure those resources are distributed fairly among all counties. There is a real risk that municipalities in the Barcelona metropolitan area, with higher demand, will monopolize most of the budget. This would disadvantage interior lines or those connecting to Aragón and Valencia, exacerbating differences between areas.
Possible consequences of poor distribution:- Lines with lower population density or considered less profitable could receive less investment.
- The gap between well-connected areas and those already suffering from disconnection would deepen.
- The mobility of thousands of users who depend on secondary routes would be compromised.
A process that seeks to bring management closer to citizens could end up distancing part of them from decent rail transport.
Fear of a Divided Rail Service
Passenger associations are already warning about the possibility of a two-speed service being configured. 🎢 Their concern is that trains will be optimized on main corridors, increasing frequencies and renewing rolling stock, while services on routes labeled as secondary are maintained or even reduced.
Groups most affected by this duality:- People who need the train to work or study from locations far from major urban centers.
- Users from interior counties whose mobility and socioeconomic opportunities depend on a regular service.
- Communities that perceive growing isolation due to poor connectivity.
Close Management versus Distant Results
The final paradox is evident: a transfer that aims to decentralize and bring decision-making closer could have the opposite effect for a significant part of the population. Ensuring that the rail network functions as an integrated and cohesive system, and not as a set of lines competing for scarce resources, is the main challenge. Clarity in funding and commitment to a territorially fair distribution are the only antidotes against fracture. ⚖️