According to veteran mobility expert Herman Welter, a lack of funding should not be used as an excuse for the current state of the Flemish public transport operator De Lijn. With the resources already available, and with sufficient political courage, trams and buses could be made far more attractive.
Herman Welter, now 83, has been observing public transport systems in Belgium and abroad since 1964. He worked as a journalist for Gazet van Antwerpen. He’s the last of Mohicans. Mainstream media don’t have a public transport specialist anymore. So Welter is the go-to person. Still. His former employer interviewed him.
Over the decades he has built an international reputation as both a critical and knowledgeable analyst. The latest round of savings at De Lijn, including the cancellation of certain routes and the strong reactions that followed, have surprised him.
He notes that the €35.5 million cut was announced a month ago, yet political reactions only came later. Decisions on cancelling routes are taken by regional transport councils, but he questions whether their members regularly use public transport themselves. In his view, these councils often lack genuine expertise in public transport.
Limited room for further cuts
Although the objective of saving money this year remains in place, there is still discussion about how those savings should be implemented. Whether alternative solutions can still be found remains uncertain.
Welter believes the outlook is difficult. So many cuts have already been made that there are few easy savings left. Belgium’s spatial planning also complicates matters.
The country’s typical ribbon development makes it extremely expensive to provide public transport coverage everywhere. Maintaining the Antwerp premetro system also requires substantial funds, for example for the upkeep and replacement of escalators. In his view, only the tram tunnel linking the left and right banks of the River Scheldt should have been built.
A network already weakened by years of austerity
The current measures are only the latest in a long series of savings at De Lijn, but the criticism has never been as broad as it is today. It now comes not only from opposition parties but also from coalition partners, party colleagues and major institutions such as hospitals.
Welter points out that cuts have been taking place since 2009. As a result, there are already major blind spots in the network, including in Antwerp. Buses no longer run along the Scheldt Quays. For residents of the Nieuw-Zuid neighbourhood who are older and do not own a car, the only alternative may be an expensive taxi.
Disputed data behind cancelled routes
There is also debate about the data De Lijn uses to decide which routes should be removed. Many trams and buses are equipped with passenger counting systems. If fewer than eight passengers are present on a route at the same time, it risks being cancelled.
Welter questions how reliable these counts are. Trade unions have also raised concerns. The passenger organisation TreinTramBus conducted its own counts during off-peak hours on a route between Hoboken and Mortsel that was due to be cancelled and recorded trips with as many as seventeen passengers. This suggests the original counts may not have been particularly careful, although Welter acknowledges that eliminating routes with almost no passengers can be understandable.
Shared political responsibility
Flemish Minister of Mobility Annick De Ridder (N-VA) inherited a weakened public transport system, but Welter argues that responsibility is shared across several governments.
According to him, the cuts began under Hilde Crevits (CD&V) in 2009. Later, Ben Weyts (N-VA) intensified the policy by also reducing maintenance budgets. As a result, around 13 per cent of the tram network in Antwerp and Ghent is currently out of service. Some buses in operation are more than twenty years old.
On the Grote Steenweg in Berchem, trams run at only 10 km/h. Welter remarks that this is difficult to reconcile with Antwerp’s ambitions as a global port city.
Public transport and profitability
Welter stresses that public transport is nowhere profitable in a strict financial sense. The aim should instead be an acceptable level of cost recovery.
He also notes that substantial public funds are spent on other projects, such as Antwerp International Airport. Air travel can hardly be described as a basic accessibility service, whereas for many people the bus is the only means of mobility available.
The Oosterweel debate
Critics often point out that there appears to be money for the large Oosterweel Link infrastructure project while public transport is being cut.
Welter acknowledges that the project is intended to reduce congestion around Antwerp and benefit the port. However, he notes that Oosterweel now costs around €10 billion outside the regular budget. He also claims that €1 billion originally earmarked for expanding Antwerp’s tram network was redirected to the project under Ben Weyts.
Oosterweel was originally presented as a mobility project aimed at achieving a modal shift: 50 per cent of trips by road and 50 per cent by walking, cycling and public transport. In practice, Welter argues, it quickly evolved into a project focused almost entirely on cars.
Investment in buses
Minister De Ridder has highlighted a €400 million investment in buses. Welter believes the public is misled by the headline figure. In reality, he says, the funding mainly serves to catch up on overdue investment and to renew an ageing bus fleet.
Improving service with existing resources
Welter argues that billions of euros would be required to turn public transport into a full alternative to the car, and such funds are unlikely to appear. Instead, he suggests focusing first on maintaining and operating the existing network properly.
A key priority should be improving the flow of trams and buses through traffic. Ideally, traffic lights should switch to green as a tram approaches – a system already common abroad for decades. In Antwerp, however, traffic lights sometimes remain green for trams even when none are approaching.
Better flow would shorten travel times, improve reliability and attract more passengers. That would increase revenue and reduce operating costs. According to Welter, with the current resources and sufficient political determination, trams and buses could become significantly more attractive in the short term.
A long-standing issue
Welter notes that the issue is not new. In the 1970s, when public transport was still managed at the national level, the Antwerp operator MIVA submitted proposals to prioritise trams on all lines. The City never responded.
Since Flanders assumed responsibility for urban and regional transport in 1991, genuine measures to prioritise public transport have still not been implemented. Yet such improvements could both reduce costs and enhance service quality.
The future of Flemish public transport
Looking ahead, Welter expects policy to focus increasingly on the strongest lines while weaker services disappear. As a result, transport poverty will grow.
He warns that declining quality, reliability, cleanliness, comfort and punctuality are pushing Flemish public transport towards marginalisation. In countries such as Switzerland, by contrast, trams and buses are used by all segments of society, including businesspeople travelling to the cinema, theatre or opera.
