Parliament gears up for battle over motor bike safety

Date: 20/06/1996

By Rory Watson

THE European Parliament and the Council of Ministers are set for another lengthy clash over moves to regulate the motor cycle industry.

At issue is not just a power struggle between the institutions over the final shape of EU-wide legislation, but basic differences over the equipment standards which should be applied.

The looming battle follows an earlier contest between the two sides as MEPs fought off attempts, tabled on safety grounds, to limit the engine size of powerful bikes. The current conflict erupted when the Commission angered bikers by trying to prevent enthusiasts from tinkering with their machines.

The Parliament yesterday (19 June) overwhelmingly rejected a series of measures already agreed by member states on the grounds that these would not tackle the root cause of excessively noisy motor bikes.

Both sides now face several rounds of legislative arm-wrestling in the conciliation procedure and will come under increasing pressure to agree some form of compromise if the new standards are to become law.

The MEPs' rebellion was led by British Socialist MEP and biking enthusiast Roger Barton and followed an extensive and successful lobbying campaign by biking organisations.

“The European Union as a whole needs to learn the lesson pioneered by the Parliament that good legislation is only made possible when you have a constructive dialogue with the citizens who are directly affected ... This process stands as a classic example of how to connect the citizen to the workings of 'Europe',” said Barton.

Before the vote, Barton urged MEPs to reject the text tabled by member states on the grounds that it ignored practical proposals from the Parliament for outlawing the trade in illegal noisy exhaust systems - a move, which he argued, would go a long way towards solving the problem.

The result was warmly welcomed by motor cycle enthusiasts. “The text tabled by EU governments did not address the concerns of riders or industry. We have seen the Parliament exert itself and through it riders are at least having their say,” commented one after the vote.

Despite initial reservations, MEPs agreed that anti-tampering devices could be fitted on bikes of up to 125cc to prevent their engines being souped up. But they believe that attempts by EU governments to impose a marking system for spare parts for larger bikes could limit sales to the manufacturer's parts only.

Similar fears that the door could be opened to restrictive practices were behind the Parliament's rejection of ministerial attempts to lay down strict specifications, including stipulations on brand names, for tyres on high-performance bikes.

While accepting that strict size and performance specifications were appropriate for such machines, MEPs insisted that the whole concept of consumer choice in the single market would be violated.

“A manufacturer, such as BMW, cannot require that only Pirelli tyres could be fitted as a replacement, for example, when Dunlop or other manufacturers had made a perfectly suitable and possibly superior tyre,” explained Barton.

Noise levels are a further area where the two sides will have to strike a deal if the proposal is ever to become law.

Despite winning widespread parliamentary support, not all MEPs attacked the standards backed by EU governments.

Dutch Socialist member Alman Metten complained that the Parliament's tactics sent a bad message to consumers and to the industry.