Fearing Blow to Corporate Trade Deal, Auto Industry Buried Car Safety Report
Observers have pointed out that 'cars form a big part of the EU's case for TTIP'
For fear of sabotaging the corporate-friendly TransAtlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the U.S. and European Union, the car industry buried a report showing major discrepancies between the safety records of U.S. and EU vehicles, according to exclusive reporting in The Independent on Wednesday.
Citing a leaked version of the analysis (pdf), which has since been "quietly posted on the University of Michigan's website," reporter Paul Gallagher wrote:
The major study was commissioned by the car industry to show that existing EU and U.S. safety standards were broadly similar.
But the research actually established that American models are much less safe when it comes to front-side collisions, a common cause of accidents that often result in serious injuries.
The findings were never submitted - or publicly announced - by the industry bodies that funded the study.
The findings showed "substantial differences in performance," Gallagher wrote. "Of particular concern to safety groups is the finding that passengers in a typical EU model are 33 per cent safer in front-side collisions, an accident that often results in serious injury, than those in a typical U.S. model."
As the second- and third-largest vehicle producers in the world, the EU and U.S. together account for roughly one-third of global vehicle production, according to a report prepared by the Congressional Research Service in 2014.
In announcing that the report had been commissioned in May 2014, the industry lobbyists noted that "[u]nder a TTIP, the two regions would represent the largest share of auto production and sales ever covered by a single trade agreement."
Indeed, observers such as economist and author Martin Whitlock have pointed out that "cars form a big part of the EU's case for TTIP."
In a briefing published Thursday, the European Transport Safety Council (ETSC), a Brussels-based nonprofit, explained: "The car industry is hoping to be one of the biggest beneficiaries from a TTIP agreement, partly by removing tariffs on imports, but mainly by removal of so-called non-tariff measures (NTMs). One example of NTMs is the fact that car manufacturers have to meet two separate sets of safety and environmental standards for the EU and US markets."
In 2013, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers--which represents companies including BMW, Toyota, and Volvo--stated that regulatory differences between the U.S. and EU "can act as non-tariff barriers to trade," in turn raising costs for consumers.
To that end, the ETSC continued, "[c]armakers on both sides of the Atlantic have argued that safety standards are equivalent, i.e. not the same, but offer similar outcomes."
But the auto industry's clandestine report clearly shows that is not the case.
With that in mind, the ETSC declared on Thursday:
We consider that the work done until now, is not comprehensive enough to justify recognition of 'equivalence' today in full or in part. That situation is unlikely to change within the deadline for the TTIP negotiations i.e. the end of this year.
We also consider the process by which the current work is being done lacks the necessary transparency and openness required for an issue of public policy as important as vehicle safety, which is quite literally a matter of life and death.
One example of this problem is that the EU's own research and position papers on vehicle safety for TTIP have only been made available for public and expert scrutiny after they have already been discussed by trade negotiators.
The appropriate and precautionary approach would be to remove vehicle safety harmonisation from the TTIP negotiations.
On social media, TTIP critics seized upon the latest news as just one more reason to oppose the mammoth "trade" deal.
"This study shows that EU and U.S. trade negotiators would potentially be putting lives in danger by allowing vehicles approved in the U.S. to be sold today in Europe and vice-versa," ETSC executive director Antonio Avenoso told The Independent. "What's needed is an open and transparent process for getting both sides up to the highest level of safety across all vehicles. Clearly without much more research and analysis, including vehicle safety standards in the TTIP agreement would be irresponsible."
Urgent. It's never been this bad.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just four days to go in our Spring Campaign, we are not even halfway to our goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
For fear of sabotaging the corporate-friendly TransAtlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the U.S. and European Union, the car industry buried a report showing major discrepancies between the safety records of U.S. and EU vehicles, according to exclusive reporting in The Independent on Wednesday.
Citing a leaked version of the analysis (pdf), which has since been "quietly posted on the University of Michigan's website," reporter Paul Gallagher wrote:
The major study was commissioned by the car industry to show that existing EU and U.S. safety standards were broadly similar.
But the research actually established that American models are much less safe when it comes to front-side collisions, a common cause of accidents that often result in serious injuries.
The findings were never submitted - or publicly announced - by the industry bodies that funded the study.
The findings showed "substantial differences in performance," Gallagher wrote. "Of particular concern to safety groups is the finding that passengers in a typical EU model are 33 per cent safer in front-side collisions, an accident that often results in serious injury, than those in a typical U.S. model."
As the second- and third-largest vehicle producers in the world, the EU and U.S. together account for roughly one-third of global vehicle production, according to a report prepared by the Congressional Research Service in 2014.
In announcing that the report had been commissioned in May 2014, the industry lobbyists noted that "[u]nder a TTIP, the two regions would represent the largest share of auto production and sales ever covered by a single trade agreement."
Indeed, observers such as economist and author Martin Whitlock have pointed out that "cars form a big part of the EU's case for TTIP."
In a briefing published Thursday, the European Transport Safety Council (ETSC), a Brussels-based nonprofit, explained: "The car industry is hoping to be one of the biggest beneficiaries from a TTIP agreement, partly by removing tariffs on imports, but mainly by removal of so-called non-tariff measures (NTMs). One example of NTMs is the fact that car manufacturers have to meet two separate sets of safety and environmental standards for the EU and US markets."
In 2013, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers--which represents companies including BMW, Toyota, and Volvo--stated that regulatory differences between the U.S. and EU "can act as non-tariff barriers to trade," in turn raising costs for consumers.
To that end, the ETSC continued, "[c]armakers on both sides of the Atlantic have argued that safety standards are equivalent, i.e. not the same, but offer similar outcomes."
But the auto industry's clandestine report clearly shows that is not the case.
With that in mind, the ETSC declared on Thursday:
We consider that the work done until now, is not comprehensive enough to justify recognition of 'equivalence' today in full or in part. That situation is unlikely to change within the deadline for the TTIP negotiations i.e. the end of this year.
We also consider the process by which the current work is being done lacks the necessary transparency and openness required for an issue of public policy as important as vehicle safety, which is quite literally a matter of life and death.
One example of this problem is that the EU's own research and position papers on vehicle safety for TTIP have only been made available for public and expert scrutiny after they have already been discussed by trade negotiators.
The appropriate and precautionary approach would be to remove vehicle safety harmonisation from the TTIP negotiations.
On social media, TTIP critics seized upon the latest news as just one more reason to oppose the mammoth "trade" deal.
"This study shows that EU and U.S. trade negotiators would potentially be putting lives in danger by allowing vehicles approved in the U.S. to be sold today in Europe and vice-versa," ETSC executive director Antonio Avenoso told The Independent. "What's needed is an open and transparent process for getting both sides up to the highest level of safety across all vehicles. Clearly without much more research and analysis, including vehicle safety standards in the TTIP agreement would be irresponsible."
For fear of sabotaging the corporate-friendly TransAtlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the U.S. and European Union, the car industry buried a report showing major discrepancies between the safety records of U.S. and EU vehicles, according to exclusive reporting in The Independent on Wednesday.
Citing a leaked version of the analysis (pdf), which has since been "quietly posted on the University of Michigan's website," reporter Paul Gallagher wrote:
The major study was commissioned by the car industry to show that existing EU and U.S. safety standards were broadly similar.
But the research actually established that American models are much less safe when it comes to front-side collisions, a common cause of accidents that often result in serious injuries.
The findings were never submitted - or publicly announced - by the industry bodies that funded the study.
The findings showed "substantial differences in performance," Gallagher wrote. "Of particular concern to safety groups is the finding that passengers in a typical EU model are 33 per cent safer in front-side collisions, an accident that often results in serious injury, than those in a typical U.S. model."
As the second- and third-largest vehicle producers in the world, the EU and U.S. together account for roughly one-third of global vehicle production, according to a report prepared by the Congressional Research Service in 2014.
In announcing that the report had been commissioned in May 2014, the industry lobbyists noted that "[u]nder a TTIP, the two regions would represent the largest share of auto production and sales ever covered by a single trade agreement."
Indeed, observers such as economist and author Martin Whitlock have pointed out that "cars form a big part of the EU's case for TTIP."
In a briefing published Thursday, the European Transport Safety Council (ETSC), a Brussels-based nonprofit, explained: "The car industry is hoping to be one of the biggest beneficiaries from a TTIP agreement, partly by removing tariffs on imports, but mainly by removal of so-called non-tariff measures (NTMs). One example of NTMs is the fact that car manufacturers have to meet two separate sets of safety and environmental standards for the EU and US markets."
In 2013, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers--which represents companies including BMW, Toyota, and Volvo--stated that regulatory differences between the U.S. and EU "can act as non-tariff barriers to trade," in turn raising costs for consumers.
To that end, the ETSC continued, "[c]armakers on both sides of the Atlantic have argued that safety standards are equivalent, i.e. not the same, but offer similar outcomes."
But the auto industry's clandestine report clearly shows that is not the case.
With that in mind, the ETSC declared on Thursday:
We consider that the work done until now, is not comprehensive enough to justify recognition of 'equivalence' today in full or in part. That situation is unlikely to change within the deadline for the TTIP negotiations i.e. the end of this year.
We also consider the process by which the current work is being done lacks the necessary transparency and openness required for an issue of public policy as important as vehicle safety, which is quite literally a matter of life and death.
One example of this problem is that the EU's own research and position papers on vehicle safety for TTIP have only been made available for public and expert scrutiny after they have already been discussed by trade negotiators.
The appropriate and precautionary approach would be to remove vehicle safety harmonisation from the TTIP negotiations.
On social media, TTIP critics seized upon the latest news as just one more reason to oppose the mammoth "trade" deal.
"This study shows that EU and U.S. trade negotiators would potentially be putting lives in danger by allowing vehicles approved in the U.S. to be sold today in Europe and vice-versa," ETSC executive director Antonio Avenoso told The Independent. "What's needed is an open and transparent process for getting both sides up to the highest level of safety across all vehicles. Clearly without much more research and analysis, including vehicle safety standards in the TTIP agreement would be irresponsible."