Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Tue Apr 21, 2026 15:02

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Times: Daytime Lights
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 05:17 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 86,00.html

Motorists must switch on lights during day, EU says

By Ben Webster

MOTORISTS may be forced to switch on their headlights when driving in daylight under European proposals aimed at improving road safety.

The European Commission wants all EU states to set a common date for making daytime running lights mandatory. It is also proposing that all new cars be fitted with lights that turn on automatically whenever the engine is started.

It claims that this will save between 1,200 and 2,000 lives a year across the EU, because cars will be more conspicuous to vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and cyclists.

The Government opposes the idea, but admitted this week that it was losing the argument and would be unable to veto a European directive.

Stephen Ladyman, the road safety minister, said that the move could result in more motorcyclists being killed. Motorcyclists tend to use their headlamps during the day to mark them out in traffic.

Speaking in a Commons road safety debate this week, Mr Ladyman said: “Because motorcycles use daytime running lights, they have greater visibility than they would do if everyone used such lights.

“Given that one of the most serious problems that we face in this country is to bring down sharply the stubborn rate of motorcyclist fatalities, we cannot afford to compromise an important safety concern for motorcyclists.”

But the minister added that he had been unable to persuade his counterparts in other countries to vote against the Commission’s proposal.

“I am increasingly pessimistic. The tide is running against me. A number of powerful states believe that it is a good idea. I believe that they think that it is a panacea and an easy solution to which their public will not object and which will help to reduce their casualty statistics,” Mr Ladyman said.

“I do not think that it will reduce their casualty statistics, but it will affect our casualty statistics. I will continue to fight the good fight, but I cannot promise that I will win.”

The Government is also concerned that daytime running lights would increase fuel consumption and pollution.

Motoring groups claim that fuel consumption and carbon dioxide emissions increase by 3 per cent when drivers use dipped lights.

The Commission claims that dedicated daytime running lights, such as those found on Volvos and Saabs, would increase fuel consumption by only 0.3 per cent.

The dedicated lights use separate bulbs that are less bright than headlights.

The Commission said 14 of the 25 EU member states already require drivers to use daytime running lights. However, most of them are in northern Europe where the days are much shorter in winter.

Some countries compromise by requiring lights to be used in daytime only during the winter months.

The Commission’s consultation paper on the issue concedes: “The benefits of daytime running lights are likely to be greater at latitudes further away from the Equator.”

But it adds: “Contrary to widespread fears, the fact that cars are using daytime running lights does not seem to diminish the effect of any motorcyclist’s daytime lights. There have been numerous experiments under laboratory conditions and field experiments that corroborate that finding.”

The Motorcycle Action Group said that the proposal was being supported by many European politicians because it was cheaper than forcing manufacturers to redesign car fronts to make them less lethal to pedestrians.

Ian Mutch, the group’s president, said: “This is EU lunacy at its cynical worst and a red herring that distracts attention from the real causes of accidents between cars and vulnerable targets, such as motorcyclists, cyclists and pedestrians.”

Mike Nattrass, the UK Independence Party MEP, said: “If other countries want to force drivers to use lights in broad daylight that’s up to them, but they shouldn’t be forcing us to do it.

“A good compromise would be to require sensors in all new cars so that the headlamps come on when the light falls below a certain level.”

The European Parliament’s transport committee voted in favour of mandatory daytime running lights this week.

A final vote by member states, which will be decided by qualified majority voting, is expected by the end of the year. The directive, if agreed, could come into force within three years.

***

Safe Speed issued the following PR at 02:44 this morning:

PR381: Brussels plan threatens British lives

news: for immediate release

The Times today reports that Roads Minister Ladyman is 'losing the battle' to
prevent EU meddlers from imposing 'daytime running lights' on all motorised
vehicles across Europe - including the UK.

Safe Speed believes that daytime running lights would increase the dangers
experienced by vulnerable road user groups.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign
(www.safespeed.org.uk) said: "It is completely obvious to us that making
motorised vehicles more visible also makes pedestrians, cyclists and motorbike
users relatively - and dangerously - less visible."

"I am certain that adoption of this rule would increase casualties amongst
pedestrians, cyclists and motorbike users. We must not allow Eurocrats to have
such effects on British citizens."

"EU harmonisation may be a good idea - but NEVER at the expense of British lives."

"We must not trust Brussels with our road safety policy - we must do whatever it takes to protect British road users."

<ends>

Notes for editors
=================

The Safe Speed campaign provides free web space to the UK branch of 'Drivers
Against Daytime Running Lights (DADRL) and has done for many years. See:
http://www.dadrl.org.uk

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 08:24 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
Do the DfT accodent Causation figures show high numbers of "Did'nt see it coming" accidents?
Quote:
....because cars will be more conspicuous to vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and cyclists.


It seems to be a very specific target. In my experience, pedestrians dont CARE about cars they CAN see coming, and are prepared to take RISKS, such as walking around the outsides of railings designed to keep them OFF the road, and ON the pavement! :oops:

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 11:45 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 00:04
Posts: 2311
Ernest Marsh wrote:
Do the DfT accodent Causation figures show high numbers of "Did'nt see it coming" accidents?
Quote:
....because cars will be more conspicuous to vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and cyclists.

It seems to be a very specific target. In my experience, pedestrians dont CARE about cars they CAN see coming, and are prepared to take RISKS, such as walking around the outsides of railings designed to keep them OFF the road, and ON the pavement! :oops:


and in my experience, I have never had a problem seeing cars when cycling (or driving for that matter) but it certainly seems that some people have a problem seeing me (or more likely just don't care).

Safespeed wrote:
"We must not trust Brussels with our road safety policy - we must do whatever it takes to protect British road users."

especially when you've experienced the way Belgians drive <shudder>


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 13:21 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2005 22:47
Posts: 1511
Location: West Midlands
SafeSpeed wrote:
"We must not trust Brussels with our road safety policy

I mean, our own govt can't get it right, so why should Brussels be able to?

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 13:23 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2005 22:47
Posts: 1511
Location: West Midlands
SafeSpeed wrote:
It claims that this will save between 1,200 and 2,000 lives a year across the EU, because cars will be more conspicuous to vulnerable road users such as pedestrians and cyclists.

Alternatively, people could just LOOK properly?

:furious:

_________________
Pecunia Prius Equitas et Salus


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 15:55 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
BottyBurp wrote:
SafeSpeed wrote:
"We must not trust Brussels with our road safety policy

I mean, our own govt can't get it right, so why should Brussels be able to?


In my view Brussels is made up of all the MPs that nobody wants and sent their out of the way so they can keep on earning ridicules amounts of taxpayer’s money. I wouldn’t trust them with a decision on anything that’s supposed to help the British people. :(

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 6 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 383 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.015s | 10 Queries | GZIP : Off ]