EMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR MOTORCYCLES
(21416)
9871/00
COM(00) 314
|
Draft Directive amending Directive 97/24 EC on certain components and characteristics of two and three wheeled motor vehicles.
|
| Legal base: |
Article 95 EC; co-decision; qualified majority voting
|
| |
| Document originated:
| 22 June 2000 |
| Forwarded to the Council:
| 22 June 2000 |
| Deposited in Parliament:
| 11 July 2000 |
| Department: |
Environment, Transport and the Regions
|
| Basis of consideration:
| EM of 21 July 2000 |
| Previous Committee Report:
| None |
| To be discussed in Council:
| No date set |
| Committee's assessment:
| Legally and politically important
|
| Committee's decision:
| Cleared |
Background
9.1 In recent years, agreements have been
reached on improving air quality through the tightening of vehicle
emission standards by amendments to Directives 70/220/EC for passenger
cars and light commercial vehicles and 88/77/EEC for heavy-duty
diesel engines and vehicles. We last reported on the former on
29 July 1998[18],
and on the latter on 27 January 1999[19]
and 16 June 1999[20].
These measures were taken as part of the so-called AUTO-OIL I
Programme.
9.2 Motorcycle emissions were not part of
the AUTO-OIL I Programme. The Commission now proposes a tightening
of current emission controls applying to motorcycles in Directive
97/24/EC, to form part of the AUTO-OIL-II Programme aimed at achieving
Community air quality targets by 2010.
The document
9.3 The Commission proposes for motorcycles
two stages of emission reduction. The first stage would require
all new type approvals for motorcycles from 1 January and all
motorcycles from 2004 to meet limit reductions for hydrocarbons
and carbon monoxide of 60% for four stroke engines, and of 70%
for hydro carbons and 30% for carbon monoxide for two stroke engines.
Mopeds are being dealt with separately. The second stage envisages
further tightening from 2006 but the exact requirements are left
to be specified later so as to take account of technological developments
in the interim. For tricycles and quadricycles, it is proposed
to reduce limit values from 1.5 times the current motorcycle limits
to 1.25 times the proposed 2003 limits, so as to take account
of their higher emission levels. Separate limit values are proposed
for diesel engine vehicles.
9.4 The proposal includes the option for
Member States to offer a tax incentive to encourage the introduction
of vehicles meeting the new standards before they become mandatory
in 2004. Similar incentives were included in the earlier vehicles
emission directives.
The Government's view
9.5 In his Explanatory Memorandum of 21
July 2000, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Department
of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Lord Whitty), says
that the Government welcomes the Commission's proposal. Save for
the fiscal incentives, the detailed requirements are broadly welcomed.
The limit values and application dates are reasonable and UK industry
has confirmed that they are achievable within the timescale. The
proposal represents "a balanced approach which will enable
manufacturing industry to develop robust technologies economically
and within a timescale that will deliver the air quality benefits
that the proposal seeks." He says that the UK industry has
expressed concerns about the possible effects if extremely stringent
limit reductions were proposed in a second stage but such concerns
would need to be considered in the light of fresh proposals at
that stage. He welcomes the inclusion of permissive limits that
go beyond those mandated for Stage 1 as a way of encouraging the
early development of the technologies which would be a pre-requisite
for any more stringent proposals in future.
9.6 The Minister says that the Government
maintains its opposition to the inclusion of fiscal incentives
because they would be made under Article 95 EC and subject to
qualified majority voting. He also argues against such incentives
on grounds of subsidiarity, on the basis that Member States should
be able to introduce such incentives entirely in accordance with
national circumstances and priorities.
Conclusion
9.7 We note the Government's general
welcome for this proposal, which is a logical and necessary step
in extending the control of vehicle emissions. The Minister's
comments on fiscal incentives are consistent with the views the
Government has expressed on earlier similar proposals and we note
that it has not generally been successful in removing such provisions.
We recognise the importance the Government attaches to maintaining
the principle of adoption by unanimity of any measure related
to taxation, though we note that the fiscal incentive provision
is only permissive. It sets the broad parameters for any incentives,
so as, for example, to prevent them costing more than the cost
of the technological changes. It does not restrict the freedom
of Member States to decide on the type or level of taxation. It
is also arguable that it is helpful for the Directive specifically
to authorise such incentives so as to remove any risk that they
might be challenged by the Commission as unlawful state aid. We
shall be interested to see the outcome on this aspect but it does
not raise any new issue. We clear the document.
18 (19309) - ; see HC 155-xxxvi (1997-98), paragraph
17 (29 July 1998). Back
19 (19747)
12158/98 and (19748) 14394/98; see HC 34-vii (1998-99), paragraph
9 (27 January 1999). Back
20 (19741)
10911/98; see HC 34-xxii (1998-99), paragraph 6 (16 June 1999). Back
| 
