I believe there has been too much emphasis given to commercial matters when drafting these new Regulations and it is in my opinion not proportional.
The quality and safety concerns raised back in 2002 with the old repealed regulations, I think, no longer apply but unfortunately they are kept to the forefront of the debate by pressure from internal market manufacturers and associations, even in the debate in 2011, the day before the EP/EC vote on 168/2013, the independent mediator aired these views:
Wim van de Camp, rapporteur. – (NL) Good evening Mr Tajani and all the people who are helping you.
Mr President, Commissioner, we have here a difficult technical and lengthy subject to address, which is very important for the internal market. It concerns not only technical standards for two-wheeled vehicles but certainly also surveillance.
To start with the first topic, technical standards: in the past two years we have had detailed discussions on five points, and those are, at the same time, the subjects of this Regulation. Firstly, the classification of the vehicles is to be made clearer. I have discussed ATVs at length with Mr Panzeri, and we have found a neat solution. We had a very in-depth discussion of the ABS and CBS braking systems on powered two-wheelers, and the braking systems must make for greater safety. For small scooters, we have agreed that there will be further research as to whether that is actually effective. We have also looked at the emission standards for scooters, since they are fairly polluting, especially in urban areas. We have looked at durability mileages: is a scooter still just as clean after five years as after the first year? We also looked at the vehicle lighting.
However, Mr President, it is also very important if we are to keep cheap goods from China, India and Korea that are unsafe out of the EU. That is not protectionism, it is simply protecting quality for our citizens.
Before I continue, I should like once again to thank all those who took part in the consultation, especially the Danish Presidency which made an important contribution, but also, of course, the Council and the Commission, for what we have all achieved.
Another couple of questions for the Commissioner. Firstly, the negotiations on delegated and implementing acts. We have agreed that the industry is being allowed enough time to introduce this new Regulation, but if the consultation on delegated and implementing acts takes too long, there is no lead time left. Therefore I would like an assurance from the Commissioner that the Commission is making progress with the implementing and delegated acts.
A second point, Mr President, concerns emission standards and, in particular, Euro 5 in 2016. The Commission is to investigate this, and the aim is that we look not just at pollution but also at costs and also, here again, at lead time.
In the past few days, the position with electrical bicycles has become somewhat unclear. Electrical bicycles do not come under this Directive. They are covered only by the Machinery Directive, 250 watts and maximum speed 25 km. I would like to keep it at that, because more powerful electrical bicycles just lead to serious accidents. If electrical bicycle manufacturers want something different, they can still be in this Directive.
Finally, Mr President, the contact with English motorcyclists. English motorcyclists have been following what we do with a very critical eye, and rightly so. It is good for democracy for English motorcyclists to keep a critical eye on us. Modification is fine, tuning up is not. English motorcyclists also have to be able to understand that.
He later made his final comment at the debate:
Wim van de Camp, rapporteur. − (NL) Mr President, firstly I thank the Commissioner for the answers and also my colleagues, nearly all of whom are now going home, for the compliments and the support I have received.
I have listened carefully to the Commissioner. He says he will keep a close watch on the lead time for the industry and that the delegated and implementing acts will not go on for too long, so that the industry will have enough time to implement the new Regulation. He has not explicitly come back to the research into the ABS on small scooters and the research for Euro 5, which is to come in 2016. I assume, however, that that is also noted and that it is being taken into account.
I have one more question, but that must be an observation in view of this debate. Will the communication on this Regulation become clear? We are, in fact, simplifying enormously, we are making maintenance and repair information very accessible. I think it is good for the EU to provide good information on that point.
I would say to Mr Bufton that, if he had taken part in the debate earlier, he would have been able to exert an influence on the whole issue. However, it is the first time I have seen him this evening and, of course, that is a real shame. One more thing: I have actually bought a new BMW motorbike for next year. I think that is good for the European industry, rather than a Japanese bike.
This, I think, is the predominant reason behind the the banning of throttles it has nothing to do with safety or the environment and Fundamental Rights were never discussed as far as I can see.
This is why, I think, UK sellers of these EU perceived imported low quality, unsafe bicycles from China, Japan, India and Korea now have these unfair and unjust restrictions placed on them.
You dealers need to get together and push the UK government to challenge these new regulations.
Last edited:
