C 80/10 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 77/541/EEC on the
approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to safety belts and restraint systems of
motor vehicles’
(COM(2003) 363 final — 2003/0130 (COD))
(2004/C 80/04)
On 3 July 2003 the Council decided to consult the European 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 European Economic and Social
Committee adopted the following opinion by 111 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) 363 final, the subject of the present opinion, is
accompanied by COM(2003) 361 final on seat anchorages and
COM(2003) 362 final on anchorages for safety belts.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 atnational level the three directives in force, which the present
proposals 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 the
vehicle 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 are
quite rightly included in the European Road Safety ActionProgramme (
3).
2.3. The EESC raises no formal or substantive objections to
the content of proposal COM(2003) 363 final on safety belts
and restraint systems of motor vehicles, since it considers theamendments to Directive 77/541/EEC to be appropriate andtechnically 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 80/11 Official Journal of the European Union
2.4. Neither does it have any criticism to make of the three
proposed 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 administrative
rules 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, either
economically or technically, in achieving this objective.
2.7. More specifically, the Committee calls for the fourth
paragraph of point 3 of the explanatory memorandum of theproposal to be corrected, since Directive 91/671/EEC has
already been amended by Directive 2003/20/EC of 8.4.2003,
referred to in the introduction to the present opinion.
Brussels, 10 December 2003.
The President
of the European Economic and Social Committee
Roger BRIESCH2.8. The Committee also calls for what appears to be a
simple oversight to be corrected in the explanatory memor-
andum. On page 8 of the English language version, the
description of the content of Article 2 ‘Implementation’mentions, with regard to obligations relating to type-approvaland vehicle registration, only two dates, whereas the text of
the article contains three.
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 Road
Safety Action Programme of halving the number of road
accident victims in the European Union by 2010.