Gearing up for fight to protect EU car-makers

Date: 11/01/1996

Tim Jones meets Camille Blum, new secretary-general of the Association of European Automobile Manufacturers, and finds him ready for the tough challenges which lie ahead.

CAMILLE Blum has been thrown in at the deep end.

One month into his new job as secretary-general of the Association of European Automobile Manufacturers (ACEA), he will join the chairman of PSA Peugeot Citroën Jacques Calvet on 15 January for a series of key meetings with the European Commission.

First, he will act as a general advocate for the industry's concerns with Commission President Jacques Santer. He will then fight his corner over the cost of cutting pollution with the pugnacious Ritt Bjerregaard, Martin Bangemann and Christos Papoutsis.

Fortunately, this 56-year-old Belgian is not new to the game. New to the car industry he may be, but Blum is not new to Brussels, having served as director-general of the textiles lobby Euratex - where he had worked since 1964 - before moving to ACEA.

“It is very challenging, a very important time for the future of the automobile industry in Europe,” says Blum.

But he admits there are tough times ahead. A fragile market in the face of mounting imports from Asia, a raft of regulations from the EU on fuel emissions and car safety, a Green Paper on transport policy, harmonisation of standards and a joint Auto-Oil Programme with the Commission add up to a volatile mix.

“The prospects for next year are gloomy,” he says. “If you look at forecasts from anyone, there is no indication of an upturn.”

Economic forecasters have been forced to downgrade their growth expectations for the EU for 1996 to less than 3&percent; while, at the same time, car registrations slowed at the end of 1995.

“This means that all of the issues the Commission wants us to consider must be placed in the context of the poor outlook for the economy and the industry,” says Blum.

“Any additional costs will have to be taken from the profits of the companies or passed on to consumers, and the consumer is in the mood for cost-efficient purchases and not for increased prices. These measures could have a negative impact.”

The ACEA says it wants to be helpful in the pursuit of health, environmental and safety targets, but insists this must not be done at what it considers to be an unnecessarily high cost.

The first test of this will be the Auto-Oil Programme, a joint research project between the Commission, ACEA and the oil industry into the levels of pollution in seven major European cities.

ACEA was so worried by the decision of the Commission to delay publication of the results of the project until this year that it held a special press conference of its own to release the data and put its side of the case.

According to the car lobby, the raw data showed that air quality in Europe is going to improve considerably in the coming years and the carbon dioxide emission targets agreed in 1992 will be met by the end of the century.

Problems continue with emissions of sulphur, nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons but these are concentrated in the EU's southern cities; places such as Madrid, Milan and, above all, Athens. Applying a common approach to the EU misses the point, argue car manufacturers. Special actions need to be taken to address the problems in these cities.

This will mean encouragement, through projects such as scrapping schemes, for the purchase of low-polluting cars made over the past few years.

“New cars are less polluting, but when you look at the fleet in some of the countries of the EU, then whatever the efforts are to improve pollution, it won't solve the problems as long as there are still too many old cars on the road,” says Blum.

Using the “best available technology” approach in the design of cars, systems and types of fuel, would be too costly and would not even address the problem, ACEA says.

In its joint meeting with Commissioners Papoutsis, Bangemann and Bjerregaard, ACEA and the oil companies will try to get this message across.

“One outcome of publishing the figures before the Commission was to speed up the dialogue in readiness for 15 January,” says Blum.

“There are not so many differences over the conclusions of the Auto-Oil Programme since they are clear, but there is always a tendency to say we should do more.

“Since we have made such a comprehensive study, we should stick to the outcome. The whole purpose of this approach was to base future policy on a rational, rather than an emotional, basis.”

The same is true for the 'Car of Tomorrow' project, much beloved of Research Commissioner Edith Cresson. Her task force to accelerate the development of cars that are safe, clean, energy-efficient, affordable and 'intelligent' is seeking an extra 150 million ecu from EU reserves for the research and development budget.

“We hope she can get it, obviously,” says Blum. “But we do get the impression sometimes that, in the mind of the Commissioner, the car of the future is totally different from that of today. In fact, it will also be a continuation of the traditional process of developing cars.”

For example, some of the research is looking into alternative propulsion systems. “One of our concerns is that there should not necessarily be one type of energy which would be the main object of the research. We think it should be more balanced. There should be a search for new energy sources, but there can be improvements on the traditional engine and the car of the present can ensure safety.”

Here again, the EU institutions must tread carefully, the new secretary-general warns. Transport ministers and MEPs are at loggerheads over the type of tests needed to ensure cars are roadworthy.

“The danger, if you follow some of these ideas, is that you might have to change the car in such a way that it is detrimental to other parts of the car,” says Blum.

“There is a real need for a global approach. It is the driver, not the car, which is dangerous.”