C 80/8 EN 30.3.2004 Official Journal of the European Union
Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Directive of the
European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 76/115/EEC on the
approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to anchorages for motor-vehicle safety
belts’
(COM(2003) 362 final — 2003/0136 (COD))
(2004/C 80/03)
On 3 July 2003 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 95 of
the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.
The Section for the Single Market, Production and Consumption, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 12 November 2003. The rapporteur wasMr Ranocchiari.
At its 404th plenary session (meeting of 10 December 2003), the Economic and Social Committee
adopted the following opinion by 115 votes to one.
1. Introduction
1.1. The proposal under examination is part of the general
regulatory framework concerning type-approval of vehiclesand associated devices.
1.2. The installation of safety belts and their anchorages is
a technical aspect of particular importance which must be
governed at Community level.
1.3. The simultaneous presentation of three proposals for
a directive (
1) is founded on the basic principle of total
harmonisation, by means of a single set of Community rulesand a single approval procedure, followed by simultaneousentry into force throughout the Union.
1.4. The need for these type-approval rules arises from the
installation and use of safety belts in a broader range ofvehicles.
1.5. The compulsory use of safety belts has so far been
limited to passenger cars (Category M
1) and to the front seats
only of lighter goods vehicles i.e. maximum weight below3,5 tonnes (N
1). Heavier goods vehicles (N 2and N 3), on the
other hand, were excluded, together with minibuses and buses
(M 2and M 3).
(1) COM(2003) 362 final, the subject of the present opinion, is
accompanied by COM(2003) 361 final on seat anchorages and
COM(2003) 363 final on safety belts and restraint systems.1.6. Only recently has compulsory use of safety belts been
extended to all categories of motor vehicles for the carriage ofgoods and of passengers (
2).
1.7. Since to date there has been no real Community type-
approval for vehicles other than passenger cars, the Member
States have been able to decide whether or not to apply at
national level the three directives in force, which the presentproposals set out to amend.
1.8. The provisions concerning heavier vehicles require not
only installing two- or three-point safety belts, but also entail
fixing them to the seats instead of the body structure of thevehicle as is the case with passenger cars. For this reason,compliance must be ensured with all three directives together.
2. Comments by the Committee
2.1. The EESC welcomes the legislative approach which
seeks total harmonisation, in line with Treaty Article 95.
2.2. The measures set out in the proposal under examin-
ation respond to the need to ensure passenger safety, and arequite rightly included in the European Road Safety Action
Programme (
3).
2.3. The EESC raises no formal or substantive objections to
the content of proposal COM(2003) 362 final on anchoragesfor safety belts, since it considers the amendments to Directive
76/115/EEC to be appropriate and technically irreproachable.
(2) Directive 2003/20/EC of 8.4.2003, in OJ L 115, 9.5.2003.
(3) Communication from the Commission COM(2003) 311 final,
2.6.2003, on which the EESC is currently drawing up an opinion.
30.3.2004 EN C 80/9 Official Journal of the European Union
2.4. Neither does it have any criticism to make of the
proposed three compulsory deadlines relating to type approval
and subsequent vehicle registration.
2.5. The directive which the proposal wishes to amend
already contains all the necessary technical and administrativerules for type-approval of vehicles of categories other than M
1.
2.6. Safety is a universal value which must be promoted by
all those concerned. No effort should be spared, eithereconomically or technically, in achieving this objective.
2.7. More specifically, the Committee calls for the penulti-
mate paragraph of point 3 of the explanatory memorandum
Brussels, 10 December 2003.
The President
of the European Economic and Social Committee
Roger BRIESCHof the proposal to be corrected, since Directive 91/671/EEC
has already been amended by Directive 2003/20/EC of 8 April
2003, referred to in the introduction to the present opinion.
3. Conclusions
3.1. The Committee fully supports the proposal’s aim of
introducing ever-higher levels of safety, even where the
planned measures may involve higher costs, as could forexample be the case with coaches. The objective of saving
human lives should be pursued with the most effective means,
always resulting from targeted research, especially if progressis to be made in achieving the aim of the European RoadSafety Action Programme of halving the number of road
accident victims in the European Union by 2010.