We have started the year with a series of events that have highlighted the weaknesses of our system. The serious disruptions to the commuter rail network, with massive impacts on the movement of people and goods, and Thursday's episode of strong winds have created a climate of uncertainty that cannot be allowed to become the new normal.
When strategic infrastructure fails or extreme weather events occur, the impact is widespread: it affects mobility, economic activity, and the entire country. But there is a difference between suffering the consequences and bearing the cost. Too often, this cost ends up falling on the company, which must absorb additional costs, disruptions, and even new regulatory burdens stemming from situations that have a structural or external origin.
In recent days, in addition to the direct effects of the rail grid collapse and the strong winds, many companies have also had to bear the costs arising from the so-called "climate leave" provision in the Workers' Statute, incorporated following the Valencia storm.
Protecting people is, and must be, the absolute priority. No one disputes that. But how we implement this protection matters. When an instrument designed to respond to climate emergencies is also applied to situations stemming from investment and maintenance deficits, as is the case with commuter rail, the cost of shortcomings that are not its responsibility is being shifted onto the business sector.
The problem isn't the right to protection in an emergency; the problem is the lack of a balanced distribution of responsibilities. The burden of this structural disorder cannot fall exclusively on those who generate economic activity and employment.
Furthermore, it is clear that extreme weather events are no longer exceptional occurrences. Climate change is redefining our environment, forcing us to rethink response protocols and mechanisms. We are facing a new reality that demands anticipation and shared responsibility. Adapting cannot simply mean shifting the costs to the last link in the chain.
In this context, we will urgently propose a legislative amendment to the so-called climate permit to ensure it fulfills its original purpose: protecting people in real emergencies without placing the burden solely on businesses. Protection is essential, but it is necessary to establish a balanced framework that properly distributes responsibilities and preserves both workers' rights and the viability of the business sector.
At the same time, we are launching a specific working group to rigorously analyze, with experts and representatives from different sectors, the recent impacts using data; quantify their impact, redefine protocols, and formulate concrete proposals that will allow us to better anticipate these scenarios. The goal is to build a robust set of measures to improve response protocols for the diverse types of events that affect us recurrently.
In the railway sector, recent events reinforce the need for a National Railway Pact that goes beyond the current proposal on commuter rail. A comprehensive vision for the network, sustained investment commitments, and clear governance that guarantees reliability and efficiency are essential. Mobility is a prerequisite for the country's competitiveness and social cohesion.
If we want prosperity and employment, we must accept that resilience has a cost, but also that this cost must be shared. We cannot continue operating with a system in which dysfunctions repeatedly translate into additional business costs. It is time to face this new reality responsibly, with bold decisions, and by also protecting those who create activity, employment, and wealth.
