PTW – The Significant Role

News from FEMA about the White Paper on Transport

FEMA – The Federation of European Motorcyclists’ Associations reports that the European Parliament’s Transport Committee ‘stresses that motorcycles play a significant role in sustainable mobility, especially in urban areas where they contribute to tackling congestion and parking problems’.

Back in March we reported on the E.U. Consultation – Mid-term review of the 2011 White Paper on Transport which was “updating” this review towards a ‘zero-vision’ on road safety, with particular attention to motorcyclists.

The specifics of that attention were to:

Harmonise and deploy road safety technology – such as driver assistance systems, (smart) speed limiters, seat-belt reminders, eCall, cooperative systems and vehicle-infrastructure interfaces – as well as improved road worthiness tests including for alternative propulsion systems.

Develop a comprehensive strategy of action on road injuries and emergency services, including common definitions and standard classifications of injuries and fatalities, in view of adopting an injuries reduction target.

Focus on training and education of all users; promote the use of safety equipment (seat-belts, protective clothes, anti-tampering).

Pay particular attention to vulnerable users such as pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists, including through safer infrastructure and vehicle technologies.

What has also been said in supporting documentation in reference to motorcycling is a mixed bag, “To improve the safety of motorcyclists, the Commission will encourage research and technical developments aimed at increasing the safety of powered two wheelers and reducing the consequences of accidents.”

“On-going efforts to better adapt road infrastructure to powered two-wheelers (e.g. safer guardrails) will also be continued.”

FEMA – White Paper on Transport

FEMA informs us that in the transport committee  members of the European Parliament voted on the 14th of July on the 625 amendments they had submitted on  “Taking stock and the way forward towards sustainable mobility (2015/2005(INI))”, the draft report of Dutch MEP Wim van de Camp concerning the Implementation of the 2011 White Paper on Transport.

The article, which can be found on the FEMA website, continues: “Fortunately Van de Camp had done his homework, so many amendments were put together in 41 Compromise Amendments.

This way amendments about the same subjects, both corresponding and contradictory,  were swept along in one Compromise Amendment. These Compromise Amendments and the amended draft report were all adopted by the transport committee.

For European riders this means fairly good news, because the report “Taking stock and the way forward towards sustainable mobility” will, after the vote in the plenary meeting of the European Parliament later this year, be the input on behalf of the European Parliament to the mid-term review of the 2011 White Paper on Transport of the European Commission next year.

This White Paper on Transport is the base of all proposed legislation concerning transport by the European Commission, which makes it a very important document.

So why is this good news?

FEMA – The Door Has Been Left Open

The first aspect is Road safety in general: in the original draft report there was no mentioning of vulnerable road users and/or motorcyclists in the clause regarding road safety. Amendment 301 has been adopted now: “actions to reduce accidents among vulnerable users, in particular users of two-wheeled vehicles, pedestrians in urban environments and older drivers”.

One road safety aspect is safe infrastructure. None of the relevant amendments were adopted as such. However this has come back in Compromise amendment 4 (paragraph 6b): “Stresses that the quality of road infrastructure, which has a direct impact on road safety, differs significantly across the EU and more than 90 percent of road accident deaths in the Member States occur on the urban and rural roads; stresses that efficient financing into this type of infrastructure has to be further promoted through different EU policies and instruments, especially in the cohesion countries”.

The original draft report already contains this clause: “the extension, within the revision of Directive 2008/96/EC on road infrastructure safety management, of its four main measures to other parts of the road network, including all parts of motorways and rural and urban roads”.

Maybe most important for riders is what is stated on “sustainable urban mobility”: we were afraid that in the vision of  the European Parliament there would be only room for electric powered two-wheelers (PTWs) – including motorcycles – in urban areas in the future.

Fortunately in the compromise amendment 9 (paragraph 11) the door has been left open: “Stresses that powered two-wheelers (motorcycles, scooters, mopeds), and increasingly e-powered two- and three-wheelers, play a significant role in sustainable mobility, especially in urban areas where they contribute to tackling congestion and parking problems as well as providing a solution for small logistics; insists therefore that the specific design and afferent benefits of these vehicles should be adequately taken into account and reflected in EU transport legislation and guidelines”.

Much is said last time about training and licensing. This was not part of the compromise amendments, but two amendments that we feel are important for us, are adopted:

1. Amendment 285: “review of the rules on training and qualifications of professional drivers, as well as the promotion and development of post-license training schemes for all vehicle users”
   
2. Amendment 299: “review of the third Driving Licence Directive, in order to introduce:

• mandatory training for drivers in new vehicle functions (driver assistance systems),
• a second phase for obtaining a driving licence,
• lifelong road safety education,
• a fitness test for drivers and
• a medical/psychological examination for traffic offenders, e.g. based on alcohol, drugs or aggression.
• the promotion and development of post-license training schemes for all vehicle users

Lastly something has been said about ITS: in some of the original amendments motorcycles were included in mandatory ITS features such as automatic braking and ISA (Intelligent Speed Adaptation). In the compromise amendment motorcycles are completely left out.

Of course we would have liked more emphasis on safer infrastructure for motorcyclists or some more on good initial training for drivers and riders, and we will keep fighting for that, but this whole package is as good as we might expect. The mentioning of motorcycles, and not only the electric ones, as contribution to tackling urban congestion and parking problems is something that has never been done before and therefore good and important news.”

Our Concerns

So apparently good news for riders as regards:

• sustainable mobility, especially in urban areas,  powered two wheeler (PTW – motorcycles – scooters – mopeds)

• contribution to tackling congestion and parking problems’ and for actions (some worries here on cart blanch actions and what these would be) to reduce accidents among vulnerable users, in particular users of two-wheeled vehicles and the stresses

• quality of road infrastructure has a direct impact on road safety

• On-going efforts to better adapt road infrastructure to powered two-wheelers (e.g. safer guardrails) will also be continued.

Our concerns at Right To Ride are contained in the review as a whole as regards a review of the third Driving Licence Directive, which sees no specific emphasis to engage on any changes on the motorcycle part of the directive, but there are suggested extras to the directive, which motorcycling would not escape.

However there is a mention without any details – on a second phase for obtaining a driving licence.  Who will that affect?  Something on top of the driving licence regime or something to affect other vehicle drivers? Because obtaining a motorcycle licence is complicated and expensive enough as it is now.

While there would be a general welcome for these “suggestions” for other vehicle drivers from motorcyclists, do we as riders see ourselves a bit more perfect than these other drivers and think that these suggestions would not affect us?

For example – the promotion and development of post-license training schemes – in the UK post rider training and assessment schemes are widely promoted already but could be developed EU wide. What if these were made mandatory and would be required to be taken every so often in your riding career?

As motorcycles get more complex with the addition of electronics, warning systems – the vehicle functions – how would mandatory training in new vehicle functions (driver assistance systems) effect each new model of motorcycle?

The European Commission recognises this and states that, “To improve the safety of motorcyclists, the Commission will encourage research and technical developments aimed at increasing the safety of powered two wheelers and reducing the consequences of accidents.” Do we think this future technology will all be beneficial to motorcycling?   The report to the TRAN Committee by Wim van de Camp, looked at greater
application
in
new vehicles for  ITS (Intelligent Transport Technologies) features,  such as the, “innovative technologies
” of automatic braking and ISA (Intelligent Speed Adaptation).

Even if this time around, as FEMA has reported,  motorcycles are completely left out of this discussion,  ITS has been hovering around motorcycling for decades, with good and bad applications. The UK Riders group – Motorcycle Action Group (MAG UK) – ran campaigns some years ago, asking riders to sign its Mullhouse Declaration. The declaration opposed the compulsory fitment to privately owned vehicles of any device designed to arbitrarily remove control from the driver to remote operation.

Is there a case of trying to adapt car and general technology to motorcycles, a bit like squeezing a square peg into a round hole?

How does this all sit with riders?

If recognition of motorcycles in official EU documents effectively becomes what is known in some circles as “the thin edge of the wedge” or in other words, the demise of simple rider freedom?

Original Source -Federation of European Motorcyclists’ Associations – Click Here

Links Information

Federation of European Motorcyclists’ Associations – www.fema-online.eu

Right To Ride – Transport Mid Term Review – Click Here

Procedure File – Implementation of the 2011 White Paper on transport: taking stock and the way forward towards sustainable mobility – Click Here

Mulhouse Declaration – 1999 International Public Policy Conference

We the undersigned utterly oppose the compulsory fitment to privately owned vehicles of any device designed to arbitrarily remove control from the driver to remote operation.

We note with extreme concern the tendency of governments to impose ever more intrusive and restrictive regulations upon the citizen.

We caution governments to remember that they are permitted to govern only by the consent of the people and that such consent when given through an election does not grant unlimited licence to interfere in the daily life of the citizen.

We further caution all governments that to impose unduly on popular freedom is to imperil the respect in which government and the rule of law is held.

Click Here