ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES 
DE LA COMMISSION 
 
 
 
COLLECTION RELIEE DES 
DOCUMENTS "COM" 
 
 
 
 
COM (84) 704 
 
 
 
Vol. 1984/0 256 
  
 
Disclaimer  
Conformém ent au règlement (CEE, Euratom) n° 354/83 du Conseil du 1er février 1983 
concernant l'ouverture au public des archives historiques de la Communauté économique 
européenne et de la Communauté européenne de l'énergie atomique (JO L 43 du 15.2.1983, 
p. 1), tel que modifié par le règlement (CE, Euratom) n° 1700/2003 du 22 septembre 2003 
(JO L 243 du 27.9.2003, p. 1), ce dossier est ouvert au public. Le cas échéant, les documents 
classifiés présents dans ce dossier ont été déclassifiés conformément à l'article 5 dudit 
règlem ent. 
In accordance with Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 354/83 of 1 February 1983 
concerning the opening to the public of the historical archives of the European Economic 
Community and the European Atomic Energy Communit y (OJ L 43, 15.2.1983, p. 1), as 
amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1700/2003 of 22 September 2003 (OJ L 243, 
27.9.2003, p. 1), this file is open to the public. Where necessary, classified documents in this 
file have been declassified in conformity with Article 5 of the aforementioned regulation. 
In Übereinstimmung mit der Verordnung (EWG, Euratom) Nr. 354/83 des Rates vom  1. 
Februar 1983 über die Freigabe der historischen Archive der Europäischen 
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und der Europäischen Atomgem einschaft (ABI. L 43 vom  15.2.1983, 
S. 1), geändert durch die Verordnung (EG, Euratom) Nr. 1700/2003 vom 22. Septem ber 2003 
(ABI. L 243 vom 27.9.2003, S. 1), ist diese Datei der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich. Soweit 
erforderlich, wurden die Verschlusssachen in dieser Datei in Übereinstimmung mit Artikel 5 
der genannten Verordnung freigegeben. 
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
COM( 84) 70^ f i n a l .
B ru s s e ls , 13 December 198^.
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMM! TO THE COUNCIL
1986 -  Road S a fe ty  Year _ _ ..u n ity
CO
M(84) 70k f i n a l .

COMMUNICATION OF THE COMMISSION TO THE CGUNCIL  
1986 - Road Safety Year in the Communlty
The delay in the adoption of the Resolution on Road Safety#  
on which the Council took a favourable view on 10th May 1984# makes it  
necessary to decide urgently on the preparation and the  
implementation of the 1986 - Road'Safety Year in the Community.
The purpose of this Communication and of its attached  
report is to formulate proposals on how the Year could be organised and  
what it could contain# in order to enable the Council to act appropriately  
Immediately the resolution is adopted.
The Council 1s invited to agree that during the Year:
a) The road safety publicity programmes of the Member States should be  
coordinated as far as possible;
b) Some Community-wide publicity programmes aimed at  
specific road safety problems should be implemented; and
c) A number of community legislative measures should be finalised; in  
this connection the Commission suggests that the Council should  
agree to priority being given to 2 or 3 of the Items included in  
Annex 2 to the Report; Its own view would be to favour the first  
three items listed.

- 2 -
The Counci L  should not® that these proposals assume %
a) that member states will pay all the costs of implementing the Year  
in their country; and
b) that the necessary credits to fulfil this aciion in 1985 and 1986 will  
be made available in the respective budgets under the appropriation,  
for information. Part A, article 272 of the Commission*s budget.

Report
1986 - Road Safety Year in the Community
Introduction
1. At their meeting on 10th May 1984 the Transport  
Ministers took a favourable view on a draft resolution on road safety, which  
included a decision to make 1986 Road Safety Year in the Community. Adoption
of the resolution was held up by difficulties within the Council on other measures  
of the "package" agreed on 10th May, but the decisions taken at the Transport Council  
on 8th November 1984 should make adoption possible soon.
2. On 12th September 1984 the Transport Working Group of  
the Council discussed the problems arising from the delay in adopting the  
Road Safety Resolution. Whilst regretting that the resolution had
not been formally adopted, they favoured starting the
initial planning work for the Year. Indeed, in view of the relatively
short time before 1986, it was important to start as soon as possible.
The Commission was requested to write a paper making proposals
on what might be done during the Year. This paper fulfils that request.
Objectives and Organisation
3,  If the objective of the Year is to gain the maximum effect
from road safety activities in the Community, there should be complete  
coordination of all the national efforts and programmes during 1986 and  
in the run-up period prior to that year. To achieve such an ideal  
would require a number of difficult problems to be solved.

4. In the first place time is very short. In a period of  
15 months to the start of 1986, Member States wo*;Id first have to
discuss and agree a common programme with the Commission and still leave  
time to phn its implementation.
5. Furthermore the road safety situation varies greatly  
between Member States. Each has its own priorities and special features.
It is therefore problematical whether full agreement on a worthwhile  
package of programmes could ever be achieved. fioreover national road  
safety programmes do not exist in isolation, but relate to and reinforce  
what has gone before. To expect Member States to make extensive  
changes for 1986 seems unrealistic.
6. Nevertheless there is considerable scope for the  
identification of aspects where Member States' plans for 1986 overlap and  
for the exchange of ideas and material. By coordinating programmes which  
concentrate on the same problem, the effectiveness of Member States'
own plans can be increased. Seeing what others are doing should give  
Member States additional ideas and encourage them to extend their plans.
7. Whilst it is unlikely that large shifts in Member  
States5  programmes can be achieved, minor adjustments and additions  
should be feasible. Not every Member State needs to be interested in
a specific part of the programme; coordination between even a few countries  
will have benefits.
8- To have any chance of achieving something worthwhile
this work must start very soon. Since it will be detailed and specific, it  
requires participation by those directly involved in road safety in the  
Member States, which makes it an unsuitable task for the Council's  
Transport Working Group. A special group of appropriate national road  
safety officials should be set up with a mandate limited in time. This could  
be a working party attached to the Commission. In any case, whatever  
form of organisation is chosen, the Commission services will play a full  
and active role in supporting and assisting the group in its work.

Community programmes
9. In addition to the points in 6 and 7 above, the
Road Safety Group should also explore whether a few additional truly Community­
wide programmes could be organised« These few items need not be vary  
extensive (or expensive) but they would help to "tie" the Year together  
and give it a real Community feeling. Annex 1 gives a few examples
of the sort of programmes that could be organised. Although these  
programmes would be Community-wide, each Member State would essentially  
organise and run their own contribution.
Publi city
10. Publicity will be a key element of the Year. It must  
be well organised and as extensive as possible if the Year is to be
a success. It will need to be organised at all levels, Community,  
national and local.
11.  To give the Year a truly Community dimension and to  
enhance and link national programmes, there must be considerable  
publicity originating at the Community level.
12. For example it would be helpful to produce a common  
symbol or logo to be used on all publicity material. Properly promoted  
and therefore "recognised" it would increase the "visibility" of the  
individual programmes and hence their effectiveness.

- 4 -
13. The need to inform the general public of the Road  
Safety Year in the Community could be catered for in different ways,  
including Community-wide advertising, the holding of an initial press  
launch attended by all the Ministers of Transport (possibly on the  
occasion of a Council Meeting) and the production of suitable television  
material,
14. The initial launch of the Year should be followed up  
with other Community level events. Competitions could be
organised, for instance to find the safest drivers in the Community or  
the most original local road safety programmes. Seminars on particular  
road safety problems could be organised at which researchers, road  
safety administrators and politicians could exchange ideas and formulate  
action plans. Road safety documentaries could be produced for television and  
radio. finally, appropriate publicity must be given to any agreed  
Community-wide activity or programme developed by the experts.
15» Since publicity is a specialised field, this
aspect of the Year should be handled by experts. Once the general
areas of interest and common programmes have been identified, the
planning and implementation of all publicity and publicity material could be handled
in a consistent and coordinated manner via the Council's Information Grxxp and with tlu
assistance of the Commission's Information service and its local offices in
each Member State.

- 5 -
16. National and Local publicity will be mainly related to
the national and local programmes and thus the responsibility of  
the relevant national and local organisations. However to the extent that,  
programmes can be coordinated, there will also be scope for coordinated publicity  
and for the exchange of material and these aspects should also be handled by the  
Information Group.
Community Legislative Measures
*'· Many of the regulations and directives on vehicles,
driving licences etc. that the Community has adopted, or is in the process  
of considering, have a beneficial effect on road safety. The 1986 Year  
provides an opportunity to mount a special effort and complete, bring  
into operation, or at least start work on a package of such measures  
during that year. Giving extra publicity to completing these items will  
help to emphasize the "Community" aspect of the Year and remind  
people that the Year is on.
Annex 2 lists some possible areas on which the  
Community could act in this way.
Community sponsored research
18. The Community has sponsored research in the road safety
field, particularly with regard to vehicles. It would be appropriate to  
make an effort to start or finish a number of research studies during 1986.  
The role of the Community in this field should be another subject for  
publicity. Annex 3 lists some possible areas for study.

Relations with other· bodies
To get the greatest posyib.e benefit from the Year  
other relevant organisations should be involved. In particular bodies such  
UN/ECE, 6CMÏ, OECD, WHO, PRI, FIA and AIT shoulc be informed at an  
early stage and encouraged to make appropriate contributions. They could  
be invited to participate in appropriate Road Scfefcy Experts' meetings.
Spain and Portugal
20. Since Spain and Portugal c au Id well be joining the
Community at the start of 1986, they should be nvited to  
participate in the meetings of the Road Safety Experts and Information  
Officers .
Finance
21. More work must be done defining the scope of the Year
before estimates of the total Community level cost can be calculated.  
However money will be required for at least the following:
a) Community level publicity efforts. Expenditure will start  
early 1985 as preparation wort will have to begin then.
b) Meetings of the group of road safety experts. It will  
probably have to meet 6-8 times in the next 12 months and  
perhaps 4 times during the Year itself. If some of
its work is carried out by sub-groups it may be  
possible to reduce the number of full meetings.

- 7 -
c) Meetings of the Information Group. A similar number of 
meetings of this Group will also be required»
d) If the work on vehicle standards is to be 
accelerated, there will have to be additional meetings 
of the Commission's Motor Vehicle Working Group.
Budgetary provision must be made taking into 
acceunt current problems of Community finance.

Annex 1
Possible items for community-wide road safety programmes
Encourage seat belt wearing, particularly in  
countries where it is not compulsory.
Discourage the use of alcohol and drugs by road
users.
Special campaigns at holiday time.

Annex 2
Possible Community measures on road safety to be proposed or adopted by the Council
in 1986
Extend the roadworthiness test directive to private cars.
Improve the braking directive, inter alia to  
include requirements for anti-lock systems.
Complete new Community standards on aspects of vehicles  
not yet covered, e.g. side guards and spray suppression on goods vehicles.
Make some optional vehicle standards compulsory e.g.  
fitment of rear seat belts in private cars, rear underrun guards on goods vehicl
Harmonise aspects of road signs and signalling not yet
dealt with.
Harmonise existing speed limits on certain categories of
vehicle.
Harmonise the content of the driving test for one or  
more categories of license.

Annex 3
Possible items for Community sponsored or coordinated research on road safety
Completion of work on next generation of vehicle 
crash worthiness standards (European "dummy").
Application of biomechanical data in the existing
standards.
Investigate ways of improving coach safety 
following an analysis of accidents.
Investigate ways of improving the safety of the 
less protected road users, i.e. pedestrians (particularly the old, the 
young and the disabled), and two-wheeled vehicle users.
Investigate the possibility of harmonising road 
profile standards based on safety criteria.