MEPs fear safety plan for pedestrians will take a back seat

Date: 17/01/02

By Peter Chapman

The European Parliament is on a collision course with the European Commission over a safety agreement with car manufacturers that MEPs fear the industry will ignore.

Commissioner Erkki Liikanen has accepted a voluntary deal, but deputies argue that carmakers will only pay attention to a binding directive.

The agreement is aimed at reducing pedestrian deaths and serious injuries by encouraging manufacturers to work on safer designs such as softer bumpers and bonnets.

The Finnish commissioner believes a voluntary deal now will result in more lives being saved in the long run rather than waiting for the passage of compulsory legislation, which could take years.

But MEPs disagree.

Ewa Hedkvist Petersen, the Swedish socialist in charge of scrutinising the deal, insists that legally-binding rules are the only way to guarantee that manufacturers will keep their promises.

In addition, a voluntary agreement would deny the Parliament any real say in ensuring the deal was being properly applied.

'I would be more interested in a voluntary agreement if it gave more guarantees. But you can't just give a carte blanche to the car industry; there should be a directive,' said Petersen, adding that she had yet to decide whether such legislation should be based on the voluntary accord or incorporate a more detailed list of design requirements.

She said Liikanen's decision to bypass the traditional law-making process flew in the face of the EU's own rules, which state that the Parliament and Council of Ministers must have the final word in this area through the co-decision process.

'The voluntary agreement is a way of making soft law that we have not used before in the road safety field,' said Petersen.

'But now they are trying to do it in a totally different way. It's like saying 'take it or leave it'. You can't deal with very serious problems this way.

'How can we monitor the results? It is said that the Commission should report to the Parliament every year - but there are weaknesses in the agreement that we don't know how to monitor.'

She pointed out that the Commission had backed away from signing similar voluntary deals in the environmental sector because it has not finalised guidelines for how they should be applied.

Under the voluntary plan, car manufacturers would be expected to introduce safety measures in two phases.

The first phase would involve implementation of less onerous, cheaper measures, which critics say would result in saving relatively few lives. It is during the second phase - not due to start until 2010 - that the real benefits would be achieved.

But, asks Petersen, 'How do we know there will be a second phase?'

Liikanen is under no formal obligation to listen to the Parliament if it backs Petersen's report, which is expected to get a first airing in the assembly's regional and transport affairs committee next Monday (21 January).

But the Swede believes Liikanen would be foolish to ignore the assembly, even though the Council of Ministers has already signalled it will accept the voluntary agreement.

The MEP is backed by Jeanne Breen, executive director of the European Transport Safety Council, which is campaigning to cut the death toll on EU roads.

She argues that even if a directive took two or three years longer to implement, it would save more lives in the long run and believes Liikanen might yet listen to Parliament if it urges him to tear up the voluntary deal.

'There is still everything to play for,' she insists.

MEPs feat that manufacturers in the car industry will ignore the European Commission's safety agreement which will be a vluntary deal.