Two things happened this month to reinforce the gloomy picture for passengers stranded on a station platform after missing their connection by moments: Infrabel, the division of the rail authority NMBS that controls the rail network, released punctuality figures for 2010, confirming the continuing decline. And a special commission set up by parliament to look into rail safety published its report, complete with more than 100 recommendations, many of which will affect punctuality - and not in a good way.

A brief history of time keeping
The figures from Infrabel show a fall in the number of trains arriving on time, from 88% in 2009 to 85.7% in 2010. One in seven trains was late by a delay of more than six minutes. Trains arriving less than six minutes late are considered to be on time, even if the delay means you miss your connection - and one in five journeys in Belgium involves at least one change of trains. During the morning rush hour, the number of late trains goes up to 16.3%, and in the evening rush hour, the figure shoots up to over 20%.

Some destinations are worse than others: Antwerp Central and Bruges both do less well than the average; Gent-Sint-Pieters does slightly better. The main culprits, according to Infrabel, are the malfunctioning of trains (in nearly 46% of cases) and the malfunctioning of infrastructure, such as rails and signals (in 17.5% of cases). Then there are the "third party" causes, such as snow and ice on the rails, international trains breaking down and blocking the way and copper wiring stolen from the system.

Jochem Goovaerts, spokesman for the NMBS, described 2010 as "an absolutely catastrophic year as far as punctuality is concerned. It's the NMBS' responsibility, and we're not trying to avoid that. The technical problems associated with our trains is a major factor."

However, according to the independent user group TreinTramBus (TTB), the situation is actually even worse than the official figures suggest. Infrabel does not count a train as late if it arrives at its destination on time (or within six minutes of time), whereas it may have been late at any point along the way and made up time later. That's important for passengers: if you miss a connection in Ghent, say, it's little consolation that the train finally made it to Ostend on time.

TTB's method of counting, according to spokesman Jan Vanseveren, paints a different picture. By their way of figuring, only 49% of trains arrived on time, and that number drops to 39.4% at morning rush hour. More than one-third had a delay of up to 15 minutes; 6% were 15 to 20 minutes late, and 7.6% were delayed by more than 20 minutes.

However, says Vanseveren, Infrabel is improving its communications, including the recent introduction of real-time information by internet, teletext and SMS. Above all else, the user group stresses, "the train remains a reliable means of transport. Delays at rush hour on the roads are worse."

Less trains, more timely?
Inge Vervotte, the federal minister for government enterprises (Belgacom, bpost, NMBS) promised "a mix of measures in the short, medium and long term. Since the beginning of 2008, almost €2 billion has been invested in new equipment, almost twice as much as in the 10 years previous. But you don't just pick up new trains from a supermarket shelf. Most of the new trains will be delivered gradually between now and 2016."

One of her suggestions - reducing the load of trains using the bottleneck that is the North-South connection running through central Brussels - caused an immediate stir. Infrabel came forward with a proposal to scrap about 30 rush-hour trains using the connection, which would ease congestion on the line and improve timeliness, but which would have an immediate effect on an estimated 20,000 passengers a day.

TTB described the plan as "panic measures" and questioned the logic. "The number of trains using the connection has remained constant since 2004," Vanseveren said. "So that can't be the reason why punctuality has dramatically declined." He also pointed out that the worst time keeping figures come from the Antwerp-Ghent-Kortrijk connection, which has nothing to do with Brussels. "It is of course praiseworthy that Infrabel plans to do something in the short term to improve the lamentable time keeping, but their analysis is largely faulty," he said.

Vervotte later pointed out that the plan was only one of the options she would be considering, and no decision has yet been taken. Meanwhile, according to a report by consultancy Arthur D Little for the NMBS, the cost of reaching a target of 90% of trains on time by 2015 would amount to €563 million. That includes €297 million for new material, for which the NMBS has already budgeted €258 million.

Safety first
"Before the train disaster in Buizingen, I constantly mentioned the punctuality of the railways as the first duty of the NMBS. Now safety is at number one, with punctuality at number two," said minister Vervotte earlier this month, commenting on the report of a special parliamentary commission set up after the train crash in February last year in which 19 people died and 50 seriously injured.

The commission's report, including its 109 recommendations, was approved by the parliament by 82 votes to 35 abstentions. David Geerts, chairman of the commission, said its findings had to be regarded as a "turning point in rail safety in this country. This report is certainly not a finishing point. We will ensure that the commission's work results in concrete measures. Great plans were made in the past, but this time they have to deliver results."

The 325-page report includes testimony from experts, from officials and from politicians, and, while it makes a raft of recommendations for improving safety, it stops short of laying any blame anywhere specific. "Rail passengers are better served by solutions than by the search for a scapegoat," said Geerts.

Some of the commission's recommendations are already being carried out. That includes the installation of the safety system TBL1+, an automatic braking system that stops 75% of trains passing through a red signal. TBL1+ is a stop-gap on the way to installing the superior EU standard ETCS system.

At the time of the Buizingen accident, only 22 trains from the fleet of 1,021 - or 2% - were equipped with TBL1+. By the end of this year, the figure will have gone up to 64%, the NMBS said. The entire fleet will be equipped by 2013. Also this year, 143 trains will be fitted with ETCS, Goovaerts said. The majority of trains will be fitted by 2023, seven years earlier than originally planned. The only exception are the 370 models, which are too old for ETCS; they will continue to use TBL1+ until they are scrapped.

"TBL+ is not the best system," Vervotte told parliament earlier this month. "But the challenge now is to substantially improve safety in the short term. In the meantime, it is clear that the general installation of the European system ETCS would take 10 years to carry out. We were faced with the choice of the highest level of safety on some lines, or an improved level of safety on all lines."

The official cause of the disaster is still under investigation, but it is suggested that one of the trains ran a red signal. This month we also learned that the number of such instances had risen again in 2010, to 130 from 117 in 2009. None of those incidents led to fatalities. To put the number into perspective, in the whole year, across the whole network, trains were stopped by red signals 13 million times.

According to forecasts, the installation of the two new security systems will help reduce that number of trains going through red, but at a cost to train timeliness. TTB fails to see the logic. "The two problems have nothing to do with each other," Vanseveren says. "Punctuality has gotten worse through the years, but safety has not improved. The two things are not in opposition."