The TRAN Committee’s meeting on 2 December 2025 revealed stark contrasting views between Flavio Tosi (EPP) and external expert Lorenzo Casullo on how the EU should approach reforming the Combined Transport Directive. Tosi stressed the need for flexibility given Europe's diverse geography and expressed concerns about rigid definitions and costly digitalisation burdens for SMEs. Conversely, Casullo called for a harmonised EU-level terminal registry, a shift from distance-based to external-cost-based transport definitions, and targeted fiscal incentives to harmonise support and competitiveness across nations. Other voices like Vivien Costanzo (S&D) and Kai Tegethoff (Greens) sided more with Casullo’s emphasis on data completeness and environmental benefits of combined transport.
The debate took place during the European Parliament’s TRAN Committee meeting on 2 December 2025. It centered on the future of the Combined Transport Directive amidst the Commission’s controversial intention to withdraw its reform proposal.
he advocated establishing an EU-wide registry for intermodal terminals, reforming the definition of combined transport away from a simplistic distance threshold to a nuanced external-cost approach, and introducing harmonised financial incentives aiming to level national disparities. This entailed clear institutional strengthening at the EU level, numerical targets for improved data quality, and financial support mechanisms. Tosi and some cautious voices, however, emphasized avoiding one-size-fits-all approaches, highlighting Europe’s infrastructure disparities, especially in mountainous and border regions, which might render rigid EU rules inappropriate.
From a regulatory perspective, Casullo’s approach leans towards increasing EU powers through data centralisation and harmonised support, potentially boosting combined transport’s environmental performance and operational efficiency. Tosi’s stance pushes for respecting national sovereignty and infrastructure heterogeneity, possibly limiting the EU’s regulatory reach.
The financial incentives recommended by Casullo could positively impact EU rail and logistics operators by creating a level playing field and encouraging modal shifts. However, Tosi’s warnings about digitalisation costs for SMEs underscore potential operational and investment burdens on smaller transport firms, raising concerns about competitiveness and market entry barriers. Consumers and environmental NGOs stand to benefit from reduced transport emissions if combined transport becomes more effective, but the uneven infrastructure distribution may delay benefits in less-connected regions.
Given these contrasting positions, the TRAN Committee will likely face complex negotiations balancing increased EU integration and harmonisation with national infrastructure realities and SME sensitivities. The committee’s ongoing monitoring of the Combined Transport Directive and Commission decisions suggests further debate and possible amendments remain ahead, with impacts shaping the EU’s sustainable transport policy trajectory.
Other agenda items at the meeting included the reinforced Parliament stance on Air Passenger Rights, with MEPs defending high passenger protections against Council resistance, and the final agreement on Railway Infrastructure Capacity Regulation establishing binding EU-wide frameworks and penalties starting from 2031, reflecting Parliament’s push for stronger institutional oversight and regulatory enforcement in cross-border rail management.