Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the "Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to the protection of pedestrians and other vulnerable road users in the event of a collision with a motor vehicle and amending Directive 70/156/EEC" (COM(2003) 67 final — 2003/0033 (COD))
Date: 2003-07-16
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: common transport policy, motor vehicle, pedestrian, road safety, transport accident, two-wheeled vehicle

C 234/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.9.2003

contained in the proposal are compatible with those of other
Community instruments dealing with related matters, and
assess in detail the impact of every aspect of the proposed

measures. This applies in particular to progress in completing
the single market in financial services and to significantly
boosting consumer confidence in cross-border transactions.

Brussels, 17 July 2003.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Directive of the
European Parliament and of the Council relating to the protection of pedestrians and other
vulnerable road users in the event of a collision with a motor vehicle and amending Directive
70/156/EEC’

(COM(2003) 67 final — 2003/0033 (COD))

(2003/C 234/02)

On 7 March 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 25 June 2003. The rapporteur was
Mr Levaux.

At its 401st Plenary Session, held on 16 and 17 July 2003 (meeting of 16 July), the European Economic
and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 109 votes to four.

1.

Introduction

1.1. Aim of the proposal

1.1.1.
This proposal aims to reduce the number of deaths
and injuries that occur in accidents involving pedestrians and
cyclists, through changes to the front of passenger cars and
light vans of less than 2,5 tonnes.

1.1.3.
In 2001 the Commission successfully concluded
negotiations with the associations representing the European
car manufacturers (including American vehicles sold in Europe)
and Japanese and Korean car manufacturers (ACEA, JAMA and
KAMA) obtaining a commitment by the industry to introduce
measures to increase pedestrian protection. This commitment
was the subject of a Communication to the Council and the
Parliament on 11 July 2001. In the light of the opinions
received,
the
manufacturers’ commitment by means of a recommendation,
or to put forward a directive based on the contents of the
commitment. The latter option was selected in the end.

the Commission proposed either to accept

1.1.2.
The need for the directive can be seen from the sheer
number of accidents — 8 000 pedestrians and cyclists killed
and a further 300 000 injured in the Community each year in
road accidents — and from the fact that the harmonised
technical requirements for the type-approval of motor vehicles
laid down in Directive 70/156/EEC are in need of modification.

1.1.4.
Thus the proposed directive gives a formal frame-
work to the relevant parts of the commitment undertaken by
the industry, thereby ensuring legal certainty concerning the
implementation of the relevant measures. In addition, the new
requirements will be part of the EC type-approval system, thus
involving the Member States in the application of the legal
provisions.

30.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 234/11

1.2. Content of the directive

1.2.1. Most accidents occur in urban areas, and it
is
accepted that at speeds below about 40 km/h it is possible to
reduce significantly the seriousness of injuries in collisions
between pedestrians and motor vehicles by improving the
frontal structures of the vehicles.

1.2.2.
The prescriptions chosen are based on the work of
Working Group 17 of the European Enhanced-safety Vehicle
Committee (EEVC) and the Joint Research Centre of the
European Commission.

1.2.3.
In order to comply with the proposed limit values,
motor vehicles (cars and light vans) will have to pass a number
of tests:

— from 1 October 2003, to equip all new motor vehicles
with Daytime Running Lights (DRL). The Commission
has decided not to recommend the introduction of DRL
by the industry until a harmonised approach to it has
been achieved at Community level;

— to study the possibility of non-rigid bull-bars on new
vehicles, and to ban the sale of rigid bull-bars as soon as
possible. The Commission intends to propose a directive
containing a test procedure for all bull-bars and similar
devices placed on the market;

— gradually to introduce information and communication
technology (ICT) elements on vehicles, to improve active
safety.

— from 1 October 2005 new types of vehicles must comply

with two tests (protection of the head and legs);

2. General comments

— from 1 September 2010 four stricter tests will be required

for new types of vehicles;

— within the five following years, all new vehicles will have

to comply with these test requirements.

It

is recognised that

1.2.4.
the application to heavier
vehicles (lorries and buses) of the criteria selected for passenger
cars and light vans would be of limited value. They are
therefore not covered by the directive.

The Commission points out

1.2.5.
the technical
requirements laid down by the directive will mean substantial
changes in vehicle design, but that the lead-time allowed and
the phased introduction mean that these changes can be made
during the development of new vehicles without having to
make costly changes to vehicles already in production.

that

The Commission anticipates probable technological
1.2.6.
changes by allowing for the development of alternative
measures to the requirements laid down in the draft directive.
A feasibility assessment will therefore be carried out by 1 July
2004 on the proposed technical test provisions, and a possible
amendment of this directive will be considered.

2.1.
The Committee approves and supports the Com-
mission’s approach, since all useful measures should be taken
to seek to reduce the consequences of road accidents involving
pedestrians and cyclists. It welcomes the fact that the draft
directive has an annexed impact assessment making possible
better measurement of the future effects of the proposed text.
On the other hand, the Committee wishes to point out that
protection of pedestrians and cyclists from road accidents
must form part of an overall approach. While it is obviously
necessary to take all the necessary measures to reduce the
consequences of an accidental collision with a motor vehicle,
everything possible must also be done to minimise the risk of
collision.

2.2.
In particular, three aspects of preventing collisions
between pedestrians or cyclists and motor vehicles should be
systematically borne in mind and developed:

responsibility of

Increasing the sense of

2.2.1.
those
involved, by stressing that carelessness by pedestrians, cyclists
and vehicle drivers very often causes collisions and by pointing
out that vehicle drivers are sometimes not solely responsible
for accidents; responsible behaviour by other road users could
thus be encouraged.

1.2.7.
Finally, the Commission points out in the explana-
tory memorandum that car manufacturers have undertaken to
introduce the following active and passive safety measures to
improve protection of pedestrians:

2.2.2.
involve
Education and information, which must
constant training sessions from primary school onwards and
repeated communication campaigns to ensure more respect
for the highway code and encourage people to act correctly.

— from 1 July 2004, to equip all new motor vehicles with
anti-lock braking systems (ABS), which are currently in
use and are monitored separately;

The physical separation of road and street users,
2.2.3.
which is undoubtedly the most effective way of preventing
pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles from colliding when in

C 234/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.9.2003

motion. To that end, it would be advisable to initiate wide-
spread studies on redesigning streets in cities where users’ co-
existence is most dense and constant. The resulting works to
install protected pedestrian crossings, footbridges, cycle-tracks,
dedicated traffic lanes, suitable lighting, beacons etc., will need
to be accompanied by public funding arrangements. As well
as the direct contribution these works will make to reducing
the number of accidents, they will help to create an urban
environment better suited to special circumstances, such as
those of disabled people, and will contribute to city-dwellers’
quality of life.

2.3.
The Committee is well aware that the aim of the
proposed directive is a technical one and relates to a precise
aspect — modifying the frontal parts of motor vehicles. It sees
some merit in the practice of solving the problems on a case-
by-case basis, but wishes to see a reminder both of the
objectives and of the overall strategy for achieving them, so as
to encourage those involved to adopt the new measures more
readily. The Committee would therefore ask the Commission
to supplement its explanatory memorandum with a reminder
that the directive is part of an overall policy, three of the main
aspects of which are recalled under point 2.2 above.

2.4.
The proposed directive amends Directive 70/156/EEC
of 6 February 1970 which sets out the system of EC type-
approval for motor vehicles. Over the last 33 years, this
directive has been rectified, amended or supplemented about
thirty times, which shows that the Council seeks to take
account of all new factors which can improve its effectiveness.
Given that the directive is so old and that so many amendments
have been made, the Committee would like the Commission
to consider reviewing it in its entirety, reworking it and if
necessary updating it in the form of a new directive. That
would be an opportunity to clarify once again the content of
the overall prevention policy for road users — pedestrians,
cyclists, motorcyclists (who are curiously omitted) and vehicle
drivers. At
the statistical and evaluation
tools on the causes and consequences of accidents could be
supplemented to make it possible at last to identify clearly the
origin of and responsibility for road accidents.

the same time,

3. Specific comments

3.1.
The draft directive was drawn up in consultation with
the car manufacturing industry, particularly the ACEA, and
essentially recapitulates the commitments presented in a
Commission Communication of 11 July 2001.

3.2. Without waiting, European manufacturers have begun
to implement the directive’s provisions. They hope it will be
rapidly adopted to provide them with legal certainty. The
Committee supports this request, since any delay could
compromise the investments made and compliance with the
deadlines laid down for the various phases (July 2004,
September 2010 etc.).

3.3.
The Committee also supports the Commission and the
manufacturers in their shared approach (Article 5(1)) of
assessing the progress made in the field of pedestrian protec-
tion on the basis of independent information and studies.
Similarly,
it approves the principle of a feasibility study,
planned for July 2004, which should make possible a set of
new, alternative measures with at least the same effects in
terms of protection as the recommendations envisaged in the
tests advocated by the EEVC.

Noting that the studies have already been started
3.4.
in this context, without waiting, thanks to the anticipated
application of the planned measures, the Committee empha-
sises the need for the directive to be adopted as soon as
possible in order to respect the already generous deadlines.

3.5.
Finally, the Committee wonders what will become of
the old vehicles, not covered by the directive, which will still
be in circulation after 2015. The Committee hopes that the
Commission will propose, for 2010 onwards, withdrawal or
adaptation arrangements spread over five years, to avoid a
situation where vehicles meeting the new requirements and
vehicles not meeting them are circulating together for several
years. For the new Member States, however, there should be a
transitional phase ending in 2020.

The proposed directive states in paragraph (3) of its

2.5.
preamble:

4. Conclusions

‘... this Directive presents tests and limit values based on
the EEVC recommendations.’

The Committee suggests that this paragraph be supplemented
by:

‘..., which constitute the final objective of the Directive if
by 1 July 2004 new alternative measures with the same
effects have not been formulated.’

4.1.
The Committee is in favour of this directive and hopes
that it will be adopted very quickly. It takes the view that it
will make it possible to minimise the effects of accidents on
pedestrians and cyclists who collide with a motor vehicle
(passenger car or light van) of less than 2,5 tonnes.

4.2.
The Committee stresses that the content of the draft
directive is the result of considerable preparatory work carried
out with car manufacturers. From 2001 onwards, to improve
the safety of users, they have worked out and applied certain
commitments, which are shown in the technical part of the
directive’s text.

30.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 234/13

4.3.
The Committee asks the Commission to include a
reminder, in the explanatory statement to this directive, that
this overall prevention policy has three main aspects:

— Increasing the sense of responsibility of all road and street
users (pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists, vehicle drivers
etc.).

— Education and information in the form of repeated
training to encourage respect for the highway code.

— Redesigning roads and streets to give priority to the
physical separation of different user categories, as the
best form of prevention is to avoid collisions whenever

possible between vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists etc. The
design changes must be made systematically when road
repairs are being carried out, and must be supported
by appropriate financial
incentives available to local
authorities.

4.4.
The Committee is pleased that the Commission has
undertaken a review of the whole of Directive 70/156/EEC,
which has been amended about thirty times since it was first
issued. This updating must be co-ordinated with the car
manufacturing industry, users’ associations and others. The
Committee takes the view that this would be an opportunity
to clarify the content of an overall policy on accident
prevention for road and street users.

Brussels, 16 July 2003.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Communication from the
Commission to the European Parliament, to the Council and to the European Economic and
Social Committee on Life Sciences and Biotechnology — A strategy for Europe Progress report
and future orientations’

(COM(2003) 96 final)

(2003/C 234/03)

On 6 March 2003 the European Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social
Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-
mentioned communication.

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 25 June 2003. The rapporteur was
Mr Braghin.

At its 401st Plenary Session on 16 and 17 July 2003 (meeting of 16 July), the European Economic and
Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 111 votes to one, with two abstentions.

1.

Introduction

1.1.
In January 2002 the Commission presented a Strategy
for Europe on life sciences and biotechnology, consisting of
two parts — policy orientations and a 30-point plan to
transform policy into action.

the EESC has commented in depth on the documents it
received (1).

In its Opinion on the Communication on Life
1.2.1.
sciences and biotechnology — A Strategy for Europe, the EESC
put forward a series of proposals, including the call for the
precautionary principle to prevail — also in the context of
biomonitoring — and to be applied at every stage; for the

The European institutions have

1.2.
supported the
integrated approach proposed by the Commission, and

(1) EESC opinions: OJ C 96 of 18.4.2002 and OJ C 61 of 14.3.2003.