Document

The European Shippers’ Council (ESC) represents the interests of European industry as users of freight transport services in all modes of freight transport (deep sea shipping, short sea shipping, air transport, road transport, rail, inland waterways both within Europe and overseas). Shippers are primarily producers of goods and services which they market, sell and distribute to their customers. The companies that are represented by ESC have both a direct and indirect interest in clear, adequate and enforceable driving and resting time rules in road transport. ESC fully recognises the importance of an arrangement that aims at supporting road safety, social protection and fair competition.

However a number of elements in the Commission proposal on the harmonisation of certain social legislation relating to road transport, as amended by the European Parliament, are counter-productive and bear no relation what so ever with the above-mentioned aims. The proposal to extend the daily rest-period from 11 to 12 hours, the change in the daily rest periods (9 + 3 instead of 8 + 4) and the introduction of a even more difficult break time regime disturb current business processes without having a positive effect on road safety or enforceable rules. The change in or abolishment of existing derogations is unnecessary because they have no relation with road safety, enforcement or unfair competition. This would only result in negative effects such as administrative burden and added costs.

The introduction of the digital tachograph was originally meant to improve compliance with current driving and resting times. Because the tachograph could not handle the complexity of current driving and resting time rules, it was decided that the rules would need to be simplified. A somewhat strange decision in ESC’s opinion, to adapt the relatively well-functioning rules to technology demands instead of vice-versa. It now appears that the digital tachograph’s specification contains technical errors and that tachograph manufacturers have indicated that they are not able to produce a satisfatory model before the deadline of 5 March 2003. In this light it seems at best premature to adapt the current driving and resting time rules. But what is even worse is that the proposal causes unnecessary negative consequences. Therefore ESC considers that the proposal should be fully rejected.

However, should the proposal not be rejected, ESC would like to draw your attention to a number of negative consequences related to the abolishment of certain derogations. The current daily resting time, split rest, break time rules, and some derogations should be reinstalled, which would make the proposal more acceptable, and limiting as far as possible its negative consequences.

ESC advises to reinstall or change the next derogations which do not affect competition or road safety:

The current derogation for transport on own account in a limited area of 50 km (EGvo 3820/85 art 13 lid g.). Driving time is obviously limited and since it covers transport for own account only, there is no distortion of competition. For unclear reasons this derogation now has been limited to vehicles with a maximum gross weight of 7.500 kg.
The limitation of the derogation for vehicles used for non-commercial carriage or goods for personal use (EGvo 3820/85 art. 4 lid 12). In the Commission proposal this derogation is limited to vehicles with a gross weight of maximum 7.500 kg. The European Parliament propose a further limitation to a maximum gross weight of 3.500 kg. As a concequences of this, privately used delivery vans with a house trailer used for holidays should also comply with driving and rest time rules. This is not a problem in itself, but a second consequence is that they also have to build in a tachograph, which surely cannot be the intention of the European legislator. Furthermore, we fail to understand why private persons who use lorry's for the transportation of their own horses or racingcars for personal use should be covered by this regulation Transport for personal use has no relation to unfair competition and only takes place a few times a year without any time pressure. Therefore, the limitation of this derogation is und sirable.
Finally, a derogation that should have been changed has remained unaltered in the amended proposal. This is the case for agricultural vehicles with a maximum authorized speed of 30 kilometres per hour. (EGvo 3820/85 art 4 lid 4). Directive 97/54 has changed the speed limit for these vehicles from 30 to 40 kilometres per hour. In the interest of clear and adequate rules this should also be altered in the proposed regulation on driving and rest time I thank you for the attention you may give to our views. Yours sincerely, Nicolette van der Jagt Secretary General

For further information contact: Nicolette van der Jagt, Secretary General of the ESC - Brussels 00 322 230 2113