Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the "Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 91/671/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to compulsory use of safety belts in vehicles of less than 3,5 tonnes"
Date: 2001-07-11
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: approximation of laws, motor vehicle, road safety, safety device, technical standard, technological change

C 260/30

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17.9.2001

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Directive of the European
Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 91/671/EEC on the approximation of
the laws of the Member States relating to compulsory use of safety belts in vehicles of less than
3,5 tonnes’

(2001/C 260/04)

On 19 January 2001 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under
Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was responsible for
preparing the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 6 June 2001. The rapporteur was
Mr Garcı´a Alonso.

At its 383rd plenary session of 11 and 12 July 2001 (meeting of 11 July), the Economic and Social
Committee adopted the following opinion by 103 votes to one.

1.

Introduction

this proposal

The main aim of

1.1.
is to reduce the
inconsistencies brought about by the varied application of
Council Directive 91/671/EEC (1) on the approximation of the
laws of the Member States relating to compulsory use of safety
belts in vehicles of less than 3,5 tonnes.

1.2.
One of the major reasons for the great disparity in fatal
road crash statistics for children across the European Union is
the Member States’ legal interpretation of the above Directive.

1.3.

This revision is justified by three main factors:

1.3.1.
The 1991 Directive provides for the compulsory use
in cars of child restraints on seats fitted with safety belts, but it
does not specify the type of system that would be appropriate
and allows for the carriage of children without being restrained
by an appropriate system where such a restraint is unavailable.

Directives

96/36/EC (3),
and
1.3.3.
96/38/EC (5) in conjunction lay down a European standard for
the fitting of safety belts to all seats of new minibuses and
coaches built after October 1999 and to lorries, but does not
make their use compulsory.

96/37/EC (4)

The new proposal for a Directive has three basic

1.4.
components:

it requires the compulsory use on the road of child
1.4.1.
restraint systems in cars and eliminates exemptions under
Directive 91/671/EEC. It also stipulates that child restraints
should, as a minimum requirement, meet the technical stan-
dard UN-ECE (Agreement of the United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe) Regulation 44.03 or its equivalent;

1.4.2.
it prohibits the use of rearward facing child restraint
systems on the front passenger seat of cars, unless the air bag
has been de-activated;

1.4.3.
use safety belts, where fitted;

it requires all users of motor vehicles on the road to

it requires that passengers be informed of the com-
1.4.4.
pulsory use of safety belts whenever they are seated and the
vehicle is in motion.

Directive 2000/3/EC (2) requires that new cars be
1.3.2.
fitted with a label warning drivers of the risk to children
restrained by rearward-facing restraints in the event that the
front seat air bag inflates, but does not prohibit the use of such
systems.

The scope of the Directive under revision was some-
1.5.
what arbitrary and did not take account of vehicle categories
defined in Directive 70/156/EEC (6). The proposed revision,
however, does take this into consideration and widens the
scope to include categories M1, M2, M3, N1, N2 and N3.

(1) OJ L 373, 31.12.1991.
(2) OJ L 053, 25.2.2000.

(3) OJ L 178, 17.7.1996, p. 15.
(4) OJ L 186, 25.7.1996, p. 28.
(5) OJ L 187, 26.7.1996, p. 95.
(6) OJ L 042, 23.2.1970.

17.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 260/31

2. Background

The Commission, the Council and the Parliament have repeat-
edly addressed the issue of road safety and in particular passive
security. Proof of this is the abundance of legislation in this
area, the main documents of which are:

— Council Directive 77/541/EEC(1), of 28 June 1977, on
the approximation of the laws of the Member States
relating to safety belts and restraint systems of motor
vehicles;

— Parliament Resolution of 13.3.1984;

— Parliament Resolution of 18.2.1986;

— Council Directive 91/671/EEC, of 16 December 1991,
on the approximation of the laws of the Member States
relating to compulsory use of safety belts in vehicles of
less than 3,5 tonnes;

— Commission Directive 96/36/EC (2) of 17 June 1996
adapting
to technical progress Council Directive
77/541/EEC relating to safety belts and restraint systems
of motor vehicles;

— Commission Directive 96/37/EC (3) of 17 June 1996
adapting
to technical progress Council Directive
74/408/EEC relating to the interior fittings of motor
vehicles (strength of seats and of their anchorages);

— Commission Directive 96/38/EC (4) of 17 June 1996
adapting
to technical progress Council Directive
76/115/EEC relating to anchorages for motor vehicle
safety belts;

— Council Decision 97/836/EC (5) of 27 November 1997
with a view to accession by the European Community
to the Agreement of
the United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe concerning the adoption of
uniform technical prescriptions for wheeled vehicles,
equipment and parts which can be fitted to and/or be
used on wheeled vehicles and the conditions for reciprocal
recognition of approvals granted on the basis of these
prescriptions;

— Commission Directive 2000/3/EC, of 22 February 2000,
adapting
to technical progress Council Directive
77/541/EEC relating to safety belts and restraint systems
of motor vehicles;

(1) OJ L 220, 29.8.1977.
(2) OJ L 178, 17.7.1996.
(3) OJ L 186, 25.7.1996.
(4) OJ L 187, 26.7.1996.
(5) OJ L 346, 17.12.1997.

— Communication from the Commission of 17 March
2000 (6) — Priorities in EU road safety. Progress — report
and ranking of actions;

— Parliament Resolution of 7.12.2000 final A5-0381/2000.

3. General comments

The Economic and Social Committee welcomes this
3.1.
revision of Directive 91/671/EEC on the approximation of the
laws of the Member States relating to compulsory use of safety
belts in vehicles of less than 3,5 tonnes as its main priority is
to improve road safety, in particular that of children.

3.2.
However, the Committee believes that the proposal
does not pay sufficient attention to raising awareness among
citizens and, in particular, parents. These requirements are
pointless if users are unaware of the benefits they offer.
The Member States should therefore be urged to carry out
campaigns to raise awareness of the benefits of using restraints,
and, in particular, because of the insufficient attention it has
received hitherto, their use for children. In this connection it
should not be forgotten that the parents’ example is crucial.

The compulsory use of safety belts laid down in the

3.3.
proposal must be extended to driving in towns.

3.4.
The statistics used by the Commission when drafting
this proposal were incomplete to say the least and do not
the Member States because of a lack of
cover most of
compatibility. A homogeneous and complete statistics databa-
se therefore needs to be drawn up so that useful conclusions
can be drawn, positive experiences in the Member States
exploited and arbitrary extrapolations avoided.

According to some recent studies, it is inadvisable for
3.5.
children to travel in a rearward facing child restraint in the
front seat when the vehicle is equipped with a front air bag.
This applies to most existing restraints. It would therefore
seem logical to make it compulsory for the front air bag to be
de-activated when children are travelling in the front passenger
seat, irrespective of the type of restraint being used.

(6) COM(2000) 125 final of 17.3.2000.

C 260/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

17.9.2001

3.6.
However, given that the rate of injury is higher in the
front seat than in the rest of the car and considering how
difficult it is to activate and de-activate air bags in first
generation vehicles fitted with air bags,
it would be more
appropriate to keep the front air bag activated and carry
children weighing less than 36 kg in one of the back seats of
the vehicle rather than in the front passenger seat.

3.7.
Users could be informed of these restrictions by way
of a simple explanatory label located in a highly visible place
inside the car by the vehicle manufacturer or distributor.

3.8.
This proposal makes no reference whatsoever to the
danger to children of other types of air bags, e.g. rear and side
air bags. The proposal must deal with this oversight.

3.9.
Another important issue is the genuine standardisation
of child restraint anchoring methods. The trials carried out by
the International Standardisation Organisation (ISO) in this
area should be followed closely. Once it has been fully
developed, the ISO’s ISOFIX system, which complies with UN-
ECE Regulation 44.03, should become compulsory in all new
cars marketed in the EU.

The Commission proposal should mention that
3.10.
car manufacturers need to recommend the most appro-

Brussels, 11 July 2001.

child restraints

priate
manufacture.

for

each of

the models

they

The Committee believes it is impossible to assess
3.11.
whether restraints always offer real benefits in large and
medium-sized minibuses and coaches as it is difficult to check
whether they are used correctly. Real statistics based on proper
research are therefore needed, as restraints may unduly increase
the cost of these generally popular means of transport but not
make any considerable improvements to safety.

3.12.
For example, account must be taken of the fact that,
due to the structure of category N2 and N3 vehicles and the
height of the driver’s seat in relation to the ground, drivers of
such vehicles are exposed to different phenomena compared
with drivers involved in accidents between other types of
vehicle, especially in the case of rear impact.

3.13.
The Committee opposes the inclusion of exemptions
in the future Directive, as people’s safety is at stake. Further-
more, exemptions do not encourage the habit of using a safety
belt. The Committee can see no reason why taxi drivers should
not carry restraints for children weighing 10 kg in their boot.
These would then be ready for use when children of this
weight travelled in their taxi. This exemption should therefore
be deleted from the proposal.

The Committee believes car manufacturers must
3.14.
incorporate a system of sound and/or light signals to show
when occupants are not using safety belts. The ESC therefore
calls on the Commission to encourage research into this area
and the subsequent installation of such systems in new vehicles
marketed in the EU.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke FRERICHS