Long-awaited and often postponed, the Roissy Express, which was to provide a direct link between Roissy airport and the capital, finally seemed to be on track, even if it was going to arrive too late for the 2024 Olympics.
This was without counting on a decision of the Administrative Court which cancelled the interprefectoral decree authorizing the work of the commuter on the grounds that it was not of public utility and thus did not justify the threat that its construction was going to make weigh on protected species.
Two pro-CDG Express arguments refuted
In support of its decision, the court rejected two arguments in favor of building the line.
The first is its necessity in view of the 2024 Olympic Games. If the argument was valid at the time the decree was issued, it is obvious that it is no longer valid today sinceit has been decided in the meantime to postpone its launch in order not to disturb too much the traffic and the “usual” users of the RER B who use it every day to go to work.
The second is the need to accompany the expected growth of Roissy. However, in the current context and without visibility on a possible recovery, it is obvious that the transport offer is quantitatively sufficient.
In addition, there are two other arguments.
Due to the current context and a massive move towards remote work it would no longer be useful to desaturate the A1 and “double” the RER B. In addition, the court considers that the concerns about the attractiveness of Paris result more from high rents, a high cost of living and the “poor economic positioning” of the city than an infrastructure problem.
If the first two arguments are valid (what I’m not sure of), the next two are more questionable.
A short term and incoherent vision from the court
Indeed, in the current context, the need for the CDG Express is less obvious. However, one day the traffic will return to normal and even if it remains at or below its 2019 level for some time, any user will tell you that the situation was already unbearable.
In the same way, betting on the fact that commuting traffic (people coming to work with the RER B) will remain at a low level is pure fantasy when we see the current difficulties to impose remote work in times of health crisis.
When you know how much time is needed to relaunch such a project, it is a short term vision. We will certainly build the CDG Express not in 2024 but in 2030 when the context will justify it again and we will have lost time for nothing.
As for the argument about the Olympics, it torpedoes itself. If we assume that the opening of the CDG Express has been postponed until after the Olympic Games so as not to penalize the daily users of the RER B in the long term by concentrating the work over too short a period, we cannot say that the project has been postponed for these reasons and at the same time say that the traffic on the RER B is going to diminish in great proportions. Indeed, with a less used RER B, maybe the 2024 option would become valid again for the CDG express which could then be ready for the Olympic Games.
A deplorable experience on the RER B
Moreover, when we talk about the attractiveness of the city of Paris, and without denying the validity of the arguments put forward by the court, we cannot neglect an argument that it completely ignores: the impact of the RER B as a first impression on the tourist or business traveler.
A crowded train, not air-conditioned, often slow when you don’t find a direct route, without a real luggage rack (a pity for a train that serves two airports), uncomfortable. Then one arrives at Gare de Nord and its court of the miracles.
Compared to London (which has come a long way), Frankfurt or Amsterdam, Paris offers the worst “first impression to travelers”. Not only is the experience bad, but it’s scary. Here we are not only talking about travel time or transportation but also about security.
We won’t talk about Stockholm, Madrid or Rome which are not in the same category (or not yet…) but Paris is still far behind
We won’t talk about Hong-Kong, Kuala Lumpur, Beijing and so many others…because they don’t play in the same geographical area.
But when it comes to the gap between the experience, the “first impression” left with a passenger and the city’s stated ambition, Paris and the RER B are the worst I have seen in my memory. When we talk about it with foreign travelers, the only feeling we have is shame. And it’s here to stay.
And I’m only talking about travelers. Giving air to the daily users of the RER B who live a hell in which the COVID crisis is, let’s be sure, only a parenthesis would be the minimum of decency.
What future for the CDG Express?
There is no doubt that the project will come back, sooner or later, and that circumstances will once again make the arguments of the CDG Express promoters valid.
By then we will just have fallen behind because we can hide behind the effects of COVID in the short term as if we were hiding behind our little finger: even before accompanying any growth, the CDG Express was to make up for a glaring and abysmal shortfall. This issue will continue to exist for a long time.
In the meantime, we wish our best wishes to the tourists who will come to Paris for the Olympics because one must be aware of the fact that as soon as they come out of the airport, the first one that France and Paris will show them is the worst they can do, the less pleasant, the less safe and reassuring, the dirtier.
Well done.
Photo: REB B at Roissy from gallofilm via Shutterstock
