3Third mobility package: revision of the Road Infrastructure Safety Management Directive
Summary and Committee’s conclusions
3.1The Road Infrastructure Safety Management Directive (RISM)—Directive 2008/96/EC—was adopted in November 2008.39 The Directive seeks to ensure that road safety—and its improvement—is considered during the planning, design and operation of road infrastructure.
3.2In light of stalled progress in reducing the number of fatalities on EU roads in recent years, the Commission has suggested amending the Directive to clarify existing—and provide for additional—road safety management procedures. These are related, in particular, to road safety impact assessments, road safety audits, road safety inspections and network-wide road safety assessments.
3.3In our last Report chapter on the proposal,40 the Committee granted the Government a conditional scrutiny waiver in order for it to support formal adoption at Council at the end of March 2019. This waiver was conditional as, in previous correspondence,41 the Government had not clearly explained a number of the proposal’s key points to the Committee and, as such, its views on these were unknown.
3.4The Minister with charge over the proposal, Baroness Vere of Norbiton, now writes—30 September 2019—with an update on negotiations.42 The Minister informs the Committee that the proposal was not put for formal adoption in March and is now expected to be taken forwards by the Finnish Presidency.
3.5The Minister provides further information on two points previously highlighted by the Committee as warranting attention: (1) the scope of the draft Directive; and (2) the ability of the Commission to set future performance standards for road markings and road signs. On the first point, the Committee was concerned that—as per the provisional agreement on the proposal reached between the Romanian Presidency and European Parliament of 27 February 2019—Member States would be limited in their ability to define what constitutes their own primary road network. Such a limitation would mean that Member States would not have full control over the roads that fall under the purview of the Directive.
3.6In response to this concern, the Minister explains that a recent amendment to the Trilogue text includes a new definition of ‘primary road’ at Article 1(2)(2b). This reads:
‘Primary road’ means a road outside urban areas that connects major cities or regions, or both, belonging to the highest category of road below the category ‘motorway’ in the national road classification…
3.7The Minister argues that as this new definition is based around national road classification (which would continue to be determined by Member States), authorities would have discretion to decide which roads are covered by the Directive.
3.8It is worth noting that the majority of Member States classify roads against similar criteria—the Directive would not mandate the creation of a new system—and, as such, if a Member State did not want a primary road to be covered by the Directive, they could choose to recategorise it.43 The Committee questions the practicality of this approach and, furthermore, whether such action would be in keeping with the Commission’s rational for legislative action: namely to improve road safety.44
3.9The Minister also addresses some confusion over the role of the Commission in setting future performance standards for road markings and road signs. On the basis of previous correspondence form the former Minister, the Committee understood that the Commission’s role in setting standards had been reconsidered and removed.
3.10The Minister now informs us, however, that the text of the draft Directive has been amended—on the back of Trilogue negotiations—to include a similar role for a ‘Member State group of experts’. The new text reads:
A group of experts established by the Commission shall, at the latest by June 2021, assess the opportunity to establish common specifications including different elements aiming at ensuring the operational use of their road markings and signs in order to foster the effective readability and detectability of road signs and markings for human drivers and automated driver assistance systems. This group shall be formed by experts designated by the Member State. The assessment shall include a consultation of UNECE.
The Minister believes this change—notwithstanding the greater involvement afforded to Member States—will allow for easier alignment with the work of the UNECE (the most authoritative international standard-setting body in this area).
3.11We thank the Minister for her letter of 30 September and the comprehensive way in which she has addressed the Committee’s enquiries.
3.12In light of recent changes to the scope of the draft Directive, we request further information on the roads that the Minister believes would be captured by new Article 1(2)(2b). The Committee is interested in whether this would be a category of road in its entirety—such as all ‘A’ roads—or would be more specific, for example, covering only certain A roads and trunk roads. Owing to the operation of a slightly different system of road classification, we request the same information for Northern Ireland. For both the UK and Northern Ireland, an illustrative list of covered roads should be provided.
3.13We note the Minister’s commitment to provide the Committee “with the final adopted text [of the proposal] as soon as it is available”. We remind the Minister that if the Government intends to support the formal adoption of the proposal, we expect her to write to the Committee either requesting clearance of the file from scrutiny or a waiver. If the Government does not intend to support adoption, we expect the Minister to inform the Committee, in good time before the relevant Council, fully outlining the reasons why.
3.14We ask for the information requested above by 13 November 2019 and we retain the proposal under scrutiny.
Full details of the documents
3.15Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2008/96/EC on road infrastructure safety management (39722), 9040/18 + ADDs 1–4, COM(18) 274.
Previous Committee Report
Thirty-seventh report HC 301–xxxvi (2017–19), chapter 10 (5 September 2018); Forty-sixth report HC 301–xlv (2017–19), chapter 9 (28 November 2018); and Sixtieth report HC 301–lviii (2017–19), chapter 3 (20 March 2019).
39 Directive 2008/96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on road infrastructure safety management.
41 Letter from Jesse Norman MP to Sir William Cash MP, 12 March 2019.
42 Letter from Baroness Vere of Norbiton to Sir William Cash MP, 30 September 2019.
43 This is not withstanding the exemptions provided for by the Directive e.g. where primary roads can be excluded on safety grounds.
44 Re-categorising roads in the UK in this way would inevitably lead to fragmentation of the primary road network; with roads omitted on grounds relating to the Directive that should otherwise be included when compared to other similar roads.
Published: 22 October 2019