Prime Ministers Petition
Daytime
Lights - epetition reply 9 February 2007
We received a petition asking:
"We the undersigned petition the
Prime Minister to ensure the continued safety of users of
motorcycles and scooters by fighting EU proposals to
introduce daytime running lights on motorcars."
The Government's response
The UK Government is opposed both
to mandatory daytime dipped headlamp use and to mandatory
dedicated daytime running light (DRL) use (except where
required by poor visibility, e.g. fog) for a number of
reasons. These include questions over the safety of
vulnerable road users such as motorcyclists, pedal cyclists
and pedestrians. Other concerns are the accuracy of overall
cost: benefit analysis figures, increased motoring expenses
and increased carbon dioxide emissions.
The European Commission (EC) has
been discussing daytime headlamp use and DRLs with Member
States for quite some time. Research has been carried out
into daytime headlamp use, as an aid to vehicle conspicuity:
there are arguments both for and against. There are also
arguments for and against the use of dedicated, low wattage
DRLs (rather than dipped-beam head-lamps) which could be
provided or mandated for new vehicles.
Mandatory daytime headlamp use or
dedicated DRLs could have an adverse impact on the relative
daytime conspicuity of vulnerable road users, such as
pedestrians and cyclists, who are not illuminated.
In addition, motorcyclists
currently make themselves more conspicuous in daytime (on a
voluntary basis) by using dipped beam headlamps. If all
vehicles were illuminated, this advantage might reduce or
disappear altogether.
The costs of additional fuel
expenses and pollution effects also need to be taken into
account. The EC estimates, for instance, that the compulsory
use of DRLs across the Union would lead to a 1.5% rise in
fuel consumption and CO2 emissions.
The UK's response to the recent EC
consultation on this subject highlighted these concerns.
The UK's reply was informed by a study of the EC analysis,
commissioned by the Department for Transport. The results
support the view that the benefits have been over estimated
while the additional costs to motorists have been
underestimated.
Further to its consultation,
recent discussions with the EC now lead us to conclude that
it may not press for early adoption of mandatory daytime
running lights. It is expected to reconsider the proposals
during the coming year. In the meantime, the Department for
Transport will continue to hold further talks with the EC to
reiterate our main concerns.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are
Volvo drivers blind? -
James May
Sunday Mirror
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
FARAGE Nigel [mailto:nigel.farage@europarl.europa.eu]
Sent: 03 November 2009 08:41
To: DaDRL UK
Subject: RE: Lethal Daytime Running Lights
Dear Mr Milnes
Many thanks for writing to members of the EU's contemptible
consultative assembly about this absurd , but cleverly sold
and intentionally oppressive, piece of EU-legislation.
Most of the EU-assembly's members are careerists, or
fanatics, who would, and do, vote for anything the
EU-Commission proposes, because they see the
EU as their milch-cow for life and as an un-challengeable
empire, which will give them ever greater privilege and
wealth - if not any real power
(which is all at the EU's Council, Commission and Court and
in the EU's client-governments)
UKIP's representatives, of course, did not vote for this
nonsense about "day-time running lights".
They vote
against the entire gamut of the Commission's wicked
proposals, and are very glad to hear that they have your
support, if only in this instance.
The truth is, however, that you cannot pick and choose,
which EU-legislation you will be subjected to.
You can either support UKIP and a policy of scrapping it
all, or you can support one of the other parties and, as
Edward Heath put it, "swallow the lot".
Yours
sincerely
Andrew S. Reed
Office of Nigel Farage, Brussels,
www.ukip.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
GRIFFIN Nick [mailto:nick.griffin@europarl.europa.eu]
Sent: 03 November 2009 15:59
To: DaDRL UK
Cc: Martin Wingfield; BRONS Andrew Henry Wiliam
Subject: RE: Lethal Daytime Running Lights
Dear Mr
Milnes
Many thanks for your message about the EU's decision to
enforce the introduction of Daytime Running Lights.
I completely agree with your assessment of the situation,
and did not and would not vote for such legislation,
a) because it is clearly wrongheaded and,
b) because even if it had merit the decision of what kinds
of lights should be used on British roads should be the
business of our parliament in Westminster and not of any
European institution.
If I can be of any direct assistance please do not hesitate
to contact me.
Yours
sincerely
Nick Griffin MEP
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
mike nattrass [mailto:ukipmep@hotmail.co.uk]
Sent: 13 June 2009 14:03
To: admin@dadrluk.orangehome.co.uk
Subject: RE: Lethal Daytime Running Lights
I support you 100% and thank you for the statistics and
input which I shall use.
ALL UKIP MEPs will vote against this. yet another EU
obsession that "one size should fit all."
"If the Swedes like it let them keep it" is my view, but do
not impose this killer red tape on us. The answer must be
"NO."
No need to even think about this I WILL SPEAK OUT AGAINST
IT in the parliament.
A prime example of why the EU does not suit the UK.
MIKE
Keep in touch please.
This one will be a Youtube event when it comes up for
debate.
"Stark raving bonkers" and Tony Hancock comes to mind!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
Caroline Lucas [mailto:carolinelucas@greenmeps.org.uk]
Sent: 06 July 2007 17:14
To: dadrl
Subject: Re: Vehicle Daytime Running Lights: Offence
against Equality Principle
Dear Roy,
Green MEPs are opposing the plans to require
vehicles to run daytime dipped headlights. They share your
concerns about fuel consumption and CO2 emissions and also
believe that it would lead to less visibility amongst road
users other than motorists, such as pedestrians and
cyclists.
On November 22nd the Transport Committee
debated the proposed legislation and Green Party
representatives on the committee submitted an amendment
calling for the removal of the daytime running lights idea.
Unfortunately they lost their amendments, however they were
re-tabled when the legislation was discussed by the whole
Parliament in early 2007. Despite Greens pushing for the
proposals to enforce day time running lights, the Parliament
voted to support the idea. Caroline and the Greens will
continue to speak out against vehicle day time running
lights but the legislative process is now so far advanced
that opportunities to do so are severely limited.
I hope that adequately explains the Green
Party position and action being taken. Thank you for taking
the time to raise these issues with Caroline.
Kind regards,
Cath Miller
Constituency Co-ordinator and Researcher
Office of Dr Caroline Lucas MEP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mike nattrass [mailto:ukipmep@hotmail.co.uk]
Sent: 25 July 2007 11:24
To: dadrl@btinternet.com
Subject: DAYTIME RUNNING LIGHTS
Just to confirm that ALL UKIP MEPs are against Daytime
Running Lights and
will vote against.
MIKE NATTRASS MEP (Transport Committee)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: TITLEY Gary
[mailto:gary.titley@europarl.europa.eu]
Sent: 13 November 2006 16:21
To: dadrl
Subject: RE: Vehicle Daytime Lights - pedestrian fatalities
Thank you for your recent email
regarding Daytime Running Lights
I share the same concerns that you
raise in your correspondence, namely that this proposal will
present greater dangers to vulnerable road users and
pedestrians.
It is for this reason that I will be
opposing this initiative as and when it reaches the European
Parliament.
Best wishes,
Gary Titley
Office of Gary Titley MEP
Leader of the European Parliamentary
Labour Party Brussels ASP 13G 30 Tel: +32
2284 7212
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: HELMER Roger [mailto:roger.helmer@europarl.europa.eu]
Sent: 15 November 2006 07:46
To: dadrl
Subject: RE: Vehicle Daytime Lights - A scientific
battleground
Dear Roy,
I support your position. But we're getting too hung up on
technicalities.
The Commission proposal is a plain defiance of common sense,
and anyway it's
none of their business whether I put on my headlights or
not.
The proposal would also result in more motor-cycle
fatalities.
I shall vote against it.
Best regards.
ROGER HELMER
www.rogerhelmer.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Honest John [mailto:letters@honestjohn.co.uk]
Sent: 12 November 2006 20:23
To: dadrl
Subject: Re: Vehicle Daytime Lights - pedestrian fatalities
Very many thanks for that.
In the UK it is a particularly
dangerous proposal due to the massively more congested
roads.
Makes sense on sparsely trafficked
country roads, as in Sweden, where the idea came from.
Not in the UK where motorcycles will
instantly become invisible.
HJ
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: keith lewis
Sent: 12 October 2006 22:04
To: dadrl@btinternet.com
As a motorcycle
instructor it is mandatory for me to use dipped headlights
whilst instructing - I use a BIG White bike and wear a white
helmet and have still had motorists pull out in front of me and
my students - if a Driver cant see a motorcycle or other road
user at a distance that is likely to result in a accident then
lights wont make any difference.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
