WRITTEN QUESTION E-2166/99

by Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 November 1999)

Subject: Road transport tachograph

On 30 March 1998, the then Commission Member, Neil Kinnock, stated before the European Parliament that the social partners had been involved in the decision to authorise the Annex 1B version of the tachograph only.

How were and are the social partners specifically involved in the decision-making process? Were and are talks held with the social partners, with due account being taken of their opinions? Did the social partners advocate the 1B option in the course of the discussions? To what extent were Member State inspecting authorities involved in the decision-making process? Do the inspecting authorities consider the tachograph as specified in Annex 1B as suitable for improving the quality of inspections?

To what extent did the Economic and Social Committee voice an opinion on the tachograph as specified in Annex 1B?

The then Commission Member Neil Kinnock also stated on 30 March 1998 that technically faultless operation of the 1B tachograph had been determined by repeated testing in working conditions.

At the time that statement was made, had the 1B trip recorder been definitively specified? Had tests been run on individual components that had been technically specified at that time (chipcards, memory, display, printer)?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 1999)

Council Regulation (EC) No 2135/98 was adopted on 24 September 1998. It amends Regulation (EEC) No 3821/85 on recording equipment in road transport and Directive 88/599/EEC on the implementation of Regulations (EEC) No 3820/85 and (EEC) No 2821/85(1) in accordance with the cooperation procedure referred to in Article 252 (former Article 189c) of the EC Treaty(2), following receipt of the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee(3).

Both sides of industry were consulted on several occasions during the preparatory work within the meetings of the committee on technical adaptation responsible for defining digital recording equipment (Article 1, Item 10 of Regulation No 2135/98). They received the working documents and attended the committee meeting as observers.

On the fringes of the activities of the technical adaptation committee other meetings are held with both sides of industry within a sub-group on new technologies attached to the committee on dialogue with the road transport sector.

Most of the inspectorates within the Member States attend the meetings of the committee on the technical adaptation of recording equipment. The opinions of those representatives are taken into account, especially since they improve the technical specifications drawn up within the committee, on condition that those opinions are relevant to the remit conferred upon said committee.

The representatives of the inspectorates feel that digital recording equipment is able to improve checking quality. However, they also feel that the transitional period during which both types of monitoring device (Annexes 1 and 1B) are to exist side by side, will inevitably cause some practical difficulties since older vehicles will not be retrofitted.

The detailed technical specifications are about to be completed and will be much more stringent than those laid down for the current analog recording device.

The industrialists who also help the committee to draw up technical specifications will ensure that use is made of technologies that are able to guarantee that the equipment functions properly.

(1) OJ L 274, 9.10.1998.

(2) OJ C 138, 4.5.1998.

(3) OJ C 110, 21.5.1995.