It looks like we've been given more time ...
Today, (23rd Nov) sees the start of a new Impact Assessment into the EU Type Approval Regulation. This has been granted due to the incredible amount of work which has been done by MAG and FEMA and everyone who has written a letter or who rode on the 25th September.
We knew that the 22nd November IMCO vote (Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee) on the Regulation would be delayed again, as MAG, FEMA and the UK Gov among others, battled to secure another, more robust Impact Assessment (IA) of the Regulation that could see an end to the modification of power-trains and compulsory ABS for all.
The vote had already been postponed twice, before it was rescheduled for the 5th December. Now we have good cause to believe it will be moved yet again, as there is no realistic way the IA can be completed, a report prepared, and the IMCO committee members given time to read it, before the 5th December.
Remember, every delay is a minor victory, as it ensures more time and effort is being expended examining this proposed legislation. We planned to ensure that every UK MEP would read this proposed Regulation and make sure it wasn’t just rubber-stamped, as much legislation is and we’ve certainly managed that; there aren’t many pieces of EU legislation that are delayed this long.
We suspect IMCO won’t have sufficient time to vote before Christmas, meaning the Plennary Session won't have an opportunity to vote until the Spring.
The full EU Parliament only meet to vote about 5 or 6 days in every month and at this rate it is unrealistic to assume they could be presented with ‘our’ Regulation until the Spring, at a Strasbourg meeting.
That’ll be our time to write more letters and perhaps get out on the streets again, because it’ll be all our UK MEPs who are voting, whether they sit on IMCO or not. We hope every rider and the bike press will ensure they hear our opinions before that crucial vote.
The great news is that we hear from IMCO that the more outrageous amendments to the proposals, like giving the police the powers to stop and check bikes, have now been thrown out. There is even a chance that because there is so much debate around article 18, the dreaded ‘anti-tampering’ of power-trains, that the whole article may be thrown out. This would be a massive victory, but is still something for which we have to wait and see.(taken from their facebook page)
Received today attached to an email response from a NW MEP. apparently this is the conservative MEP's stance on the current proposals and comes from within the IMCO. :Areas of Concern regarding EU motorcycle legislationMandatory ABS... It is already the case that motorcycle manufacturers are fitting ABS as well as traction control systems on high powered motorcycles, and this follows consumer demand. There is also strong political pressure to get the balance of interests right between riders, the industry, and safety, while not losing sight of improvements to motorcycle emissions.The overall cost benefit of ABS is stacked in favour of mandatory ABS for higher powered motorcycles. However, riders have been arguing for an ABS off-switch for certain conditions such as driving on loose gravel. This concern is almost exclusively relevant for dual use rides (off and on-road), and please note here that Enduro and Trial motorcycles will have a separate category (L3e) under the revised rules without mandatory ABS. Furthermore, when negotiating compromises, we will be asking the lead (or Rapporteur) MEP to consider proposing an off-switch for ABS for those PTW categories where ABS will end up being mandatory. Finally, there is political pressure in IMCO to introduce ABS on lesser powered PTWs, but we are resisting this as there is a lack of consistent evidence that this would improve safety for these types of motorcycle.Anti tampering and single vehicle approvalClearly, the IMCO Committee does not support putting an end to aftermarket sales of spare parts for repairs and improvements. Anti-tampering measures are intended to stop alterations to the vehicle’s power for safety purposes or to meet environmental performance requirements. These are currently limited to mopeds and motorcycles under 125cc producing less than 11kW.The Commission has now proposed to extend cover to all vehicles within the scope of the draft law and we are well aware that there is concern over the extent to which this may restrict the ability of after-market parts manufacturers to sell their products because of potential difficulties they may have in securing type approval, particularly for parts produced in small volumes. In any case, the European Parliament retains a right of scrutiny over any such future measures and it is absolutely not the case that the Commission will be able to design these technical specifications behind closed doors, nor is it in their interest, so drive train improvements or part replacements using aftermarket parts will continue to be allowed.Furthermore single vehicle approvals (SVA) will continue to be possible for those who tune their own motorcycles or modify their rides with parts, which if not designed to work together, require individual approval. Under the new proposals, after modification or tuning of the power train, a motorcycle must still comply with applicable technical requirements set at EU level (Article 18(4) of the Commission proposal). For the rest, the matter is largely left to national rules, which means riders and repairers will continue to be able to modify motorcycles as per the applicable rules in the UK. There are amendments tabled in IMCO calling for any modifications to the motorcycle to be checked by a competent authority (setting up national agencies to inspect emissions in particular), but I strongly believe these ideas will not meet with majority support, neither in the European Parliament, nor in the Council of Ministers.Mandatory Automatic Headlight-OnIn certain specific circumstances, there may be safety grounds for switching a motorcycle's headlight off, such as when the sun is behind the rider and the headlight blends into the bright background or when the motorcycle headlight is directly aligned and in front of one of the headlights on a car or van (and stays aligned over the period the rider is being looked at by other road users), making the rider almost invisible.However, even in these circumstances, we are not at all convinced that there is clear evidence to support that the motorcycle is less visible to other road users. This depends on the precise colour and intensity of the bright background (the sun's colour and intensity varies, as do other vehicles' headlights in size, colour, glare and relative distance from the ground). If the blending is not a near perfect match, we believe that the rider would be more visible with his headlight on anyway. Overall, our position is quite clear that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks for this safety provision.Mandatory on board diagnostic equipment (OBD)The intention of OBD is not to affect the motorcycle's behaviour, but to provide the rider with information that there is a malfunction in the form of a warning light. This could be developed into OBD systems which provide more detail on the type and severity of the malfunction, but we are against any limp-home functions that may activate unexpectedly while riding. If the malfunction is so serious that the motorcycle runs a real and imminent risk of being seriously damaged, compromising rider security in the process, a limp home function might be welcome, but our proposal would be that it activates only once the motorcycle has been brought to a standstill first. We are supporting OBD Stage (I) requirements but proposing to delete OBD Stage (II) from the draft Regulation because these would entail significantly higher costs for manufacturers which would be reflected on retail prices, without demonstrating a good return on investment in terms of added benefits.Furthermore, we understand that most PTW manufacturers already offer monitoring systems similar to what OBD Stage (I) would require, which may explain why some MEPs support the idea of bringing forwards the implementation date here (as part of Euro stage 4(5)). The Conservative MEPs have not tabled any amendment to that effect and will try to resist this to ensure all manufacturers can comply in time.
![New Impact Assessment begins into EU regulation - Forums [Biker Match]](/images/backgrounds/strips/8mobileLQ.jpg)
![New Impact Assessment begins into EU regulation - Forums [Biker Match]](/images/backgrounds/strips/8desktopLQ.jpg)
