§ Peter BottomleyTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what384W differences there are between the technical test requirements proposed by Working Group 17 of the EEVC (European Enhanced Vehicle-safety Committee) and those proposed by the European motor industry for (a) impact speed for a child's head, (b) mass of a child's head, (c) maximum tibia acceleration and (d) maximum knee bend angle; and what ways the different proposals can be expected to produce different test results for pedestrians hit by a car. [9044]
§ Mr. JamiesonA comparison of the technical requirements is given in the table:
WG17 proposal Negotiated agreement Phase 1 Phase 2 (a) Child's head impact speed (km/h) 40 35 40 (b) Child's head mass (kg) 2.5 3.5 2.5 (c) Max tibia acceleration (g) 150 200 150 (d) Minimum knee bend angle (deg) 15 21 15 In comparison with the first phase of a negotiated agreement, the WG17 proposal offers greater protection against head injuries and reduced likelihood of leg injuries, a particular aspect being reduced knee injuries.
§ Peter BottomleyTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions what is the draft timetable for the stages for implementing the proposals of Working Group 17 of EEVC. [9048]
§ Mr. JamiesonThe Commission are expected to make a decision on whether to accept the Industry proposal for a negotiated agreement in December this year. If this option is taken, pedestrian protection measures will start to be introduced in 2005, and the Working Group 17 proposals (or equivalent) will be fully implemented by 2015.
If the negotiated agreement route is not taken, the Commission may decide to propose a Directive. Such a Directive would need to be discussed through the European Council and Parliament through the Co-decision Procedure, and the implementation dates would depend on the timing and outcome of these discussions.
§ Peter BottomleyTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will make a statement on the change in number and intensity of pedestrian accidents if all cars in the(a) United Kingdom, and (b) EU had fronts that met the requirements of Working Group 17 of EEVC. [9046]
§ Mr. JamiesonThe number of pedestrian accidents would not be affected by implementation of the Working Group 17 (WG17) proposals. However, past research by TRL (Transport Research Laboratory) estimated that measures similar to those recommended by WG17 would reduce the total number of pedestrian deaths by 8 per cent. and serious injuries by 21 per cent. This was applicable to both the UK and the EU. Other studies suggest a wider range of possible benefits.
§ Peter BottomleyTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will list the points made in response to consultations on the alternative ways to reduce the consequences of car crashes to pedestrians. [9045]
385W
§ Mr. JamiesonWe are currently considering the responses we have received. We plan to make the results of the consultation available when we have completed this process.
§ Peter BottomleyTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions when he will decide between the safety proposals put forward by Working Group 17 of EEVC and the alternative proposals. [9047]
§ Mr. JamiesonWe are currently considering the responses we have received to our consultation on the Commission's proposal for a negotiated agreement with manufactures, and hope to have reached a conclusion by mid-November.
§ Mr. KidneyTo ask the Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions if he will list the research and development programmes that the Government have funded for the design and production of safer car fronts since 1979. [9069]
§ Mr. JamiesonThe bulk of the UK research into safer car fronts has been carried out under TRL contracts S220C/VF and S222C/VF (pedestrian protection test procedures and design) which cover the period between 1992 and 2002.
Related research on vehicle/pedestrian safety has taken place under TRL contracts S071M/VF (test requirements for bull bars) and S310B/VF (advanced adaptive safety systems).
Further work in this general area is being undertaken in three new projects under the Government's foresight programme. These include the SHORSEN and APVRU projects which look at advanced pedestrian detection systems, and PEDSALI, which examines the use of advanced materials for pedestrian-friendly bumpers.