EU Hands off Biking

[Kevin]

I'm sure the MAG EU Hands of Biking ride must be on here somewhere but I couldn't find it. I wanted to bring it to the top to remind everyone it's tomorrow but I'll post this instead.

You are all members of MAG aren't you?

Kevin

[Winston Smith]

You are all members of MAG aren't you?

Kevin

Erm.......... No!

[Kevin]

Well that doesn't stop you riding tomorrow and as long as there are enough of us who are willing to fund MAG the rest of you can sleep at night knowing that someone is fighting our corner.

Kevin

[Winston Smith]

Will be trying to avoid the 'demo for our rights' as it p***es off the rest of the motoring public, as I head to the Channel Tunnel

[Kevin]

[nods] Yep, much better to passively take it. When you get over to the other side, hit traffic and start to filter maybe you could make a point of silently thanking the French bikers whose demonstrations helped stopped the law against filtering being enforced.

"You've got to be disruptive enough to drive change but not so disruptive that no-one can deal with you" - Bob Lutz.

I hope these short rides tomorrow, which won't completely block the motorway as long as everyone does what they're supposed to do, won't massively impact anyone but you can't make an omelette...

Kevin

[Lonewolf]

No, I'm not a member either. Cant say I agree with their tactics for tomorrow's demo.

[Kevin]

So what tactics would you suggest may work? (Genuine question)

Kevin

[mecki]

I don't understand what this protest is supposed to be for or against anyway?
And the people who travel in cages don't know and understand even less why you guys are doing this and will just have one more reason to hate bikers even more.
A lot of the proposed regulations make perfect sense to me and are already law in most other EU countries.
And I see a lot of modified bikes out there that really shouldn't be allowed to be ridden on public roads full stop.

So is it just some more right-wing EU-bashing?

Without EU-wide regulations we might face inspections if our bikes conform with local legislation if we want to leave the island in future.
If your bike has for instance more than 100 bhp you wouldn't be allowed to ride it in France any more.
But if there are EU-wide rules then the French can impose such a thing only on bikes registered in their country while you're still OK as long as your bike complies with EU regulations.
Have you even thought about that, before you endorse yet another campaign against the 'evil' EU?

Don't think that other countries will always tolerate your noisy exhaust just because you have a GB plate and it's not illegal over here.

[Kevin]

Tough crowd!

<Snip> A lot of the proposed regulations make perfect sense to me and are already law in most other EU countries. <snip>

From what you've just said I suspect you don't actually know what the proposals are because they are not yet 'law in most other EU countries'. You could have used a search engine to find out but I'll save you the bother. This is from a MAG communique and yes, of course I realise MAG is putting their own spin on it, in exactly the same that proponents of the changes are also using spin.

<snip> here are the main restrictions that look set to be introduced on new bikes from 2015:

1. Compulsory Anti-lock and/or Combined Braking Systems on all new motorcycles and scooters over 50cc.

Advanced braking systems add cost and complexity to the manufacture and servicing of bikes, but do not always help the rider (especially on loose surfaces such as gravel).  The Commission's evidence that the costs are outweighed by the benefits is patchy and may rely too much on data from commercial interests.  Consumers should retain the choice to specify ABS if they want it, there should always be an option to disable ABS when necessary.

2. Three new progressively tighter emissions limits to be introduced over 5 years.

Real-world trials of various sizes of bikes and comparable cars on commuting routes show that bikes offer shorter journey-times and lower fuel-consumption.  The Commission's evidence relies on one source and does not adequately consider the additional costs and impacts on fuel-economy from adding pollution control technology developed for large vehicles on to small lightweight vehicles.  The Commission justifies this by emphasising that bikes account for a growing proportion of some traffic pollutants, but the context is that the total generated by all types of vehicle has fallen to a very low level.

3. Devices to prevent modification of the engine or transmission (including restricted choice of air-filter, drive sprockets or rear-tyre).

Riders of identical bikes are not themselves identical, nor are their journeys.  Bikes used mostly on motorways need different drive characteristics to those used mostly on urban streets or rural roads, these can be achieved easily, eg; by choosing different drive sprockets or tyre dimensions.  The Commission wishes to add cost and complexity to vehicle design so that owners will be restricted in modifying their bikes to suit their needs in this way.

Partly the Commission wants to stop novice riders tuning their bikes to perform better than their driving licence allows.  The Commission prefer to penalise riders who want to de-restrict their learner-bike once they are fully qualified, not to mention already-qualified riders who need or want lightweight bikes with good performance.

4. Computer chips on every bike to monitor and ultimately disable engines.

The Commission envisages basic chips on all bikes to record breaches of emission limits as a pre-cursor to requiring more sophisticated devices capable of disabling bikes and storing information about riding characteristics at a later stage.

5. Road-side checks of passing bikes (but not cars)

The Commission proposes all EU Member States should mount road-side checks of passing bikes as one means of enforcing restrictions on riders' ability to modify their bikes.  This iniquitous threat to the free-movement of citizens does not extend to people travelling in modified cars.

6. Impact on after-market parts suppliers

The Commission's impact assessment considers the effect of changes on the manufacturers of original equipment to the detriment of alternative suppliers of after-market components and spare parts, future consumer-choice of replacement parts has not been adequately considered.

7. New rules to allow non-Type Approved vehicles to be used on the road

The Commission seems to expect one-off specials and custom builds, bikes built in small production runs (perhaps even bikes built before Type Approval), etc. to meet the same standards as big manufacturers who can spread the very high costs of gaining Type Approval over the whole production run of mass-produced bikes that have had millions spent on their development.  Currently, 'Single Vehicle Approval' rules allow builders of individual bikes and small production runs to register bikes for road use provided they meet national construction and use regulations, this sensible approach must be safeguarded.

8. Power and speed limits to restrict development of electric motorcycles

The development of electric drive technology could see the development of low-, medium- and high-performance alternatives to fossil-fuel bikes in the foreseeable future.  The Commission wishes to restrict that competition by imposing speed and power limits on electric bikes.  This gross interference in the development of consumer choice may also indicate an intention to restrict the performance of future cars or other personal transport vehicles.

Last Tuesday (30th September), a meeting of 'IMCO', the Internal Market and Consumer Protection Committee of MEPs which is overseeing the European Commission's proposals, discussed progress on negotiations with the Commission on more than 300 amendments tabled by MEPs.

Sadly, it looks as though Dutch MEP Wim van de Camp, who is taking the lead in negotiations with the Commission, not only agrees with many of the Commission's proposals, he sees little room for compromise on most of the amendments put forward by his fellow MEPs.  The alliances formed between different blocks of political parties in the European Parliament could yet deliver a majority of votes to Mr van de Camp – unless we all do something to turn it around.

A later one says:

The Labour block of MEPs now appear to be supporting either a switch on
ABS, or no compulsion.

The UK Government is now as concerned as we are, that there hasn't been
the research to back much of the content in the Proposal and that the
Impact Assessment carried out was not robust.

They are concerned about the impact on consumers (us!), the increased
costs and complexity of bikes and the right of the UK to maintain its
Single Vehicle Approval (SVA) system, so that one off customs can still
be built.

In Ireland...

The Road Safety Authority in Ireland has confirmed that it intends to
make hi-viz clothing compulsory for all motorcyclists from 2014.

MAG(UK) requested confirmation earlier today after the Irish Road Safety
Authority told a reporter that the RSA wanted voluntary wearing of high
visibility jackets rather than compulsion.

Asked when the RSA had changed it's mind about mandatory wearing of high
visibility upper body clothing with full sleeves for ride and pillion
passenger, the Communications Manager at the RSA emailed MAG(UK) saying;

"I can confirm that the RSA has not dropped the position outlined in the
Motorcycle Action plan. We do intend to seek to introduce the measure in
2014, subject to consultation with motorcyclists and industry on the
most appropriate type of hi-viz material and possible solutions."

Too many riders have been unwilling to believe they will be forced to
wear day-glo clothing in the near future.  Until now the RSA has
soft-pedalled its determination to legislate, but now there is no doubt
that the authorities are serious.

I have a strong suspicion that the EU will eventually climb down a little in what looks like some form of appeasement and fall back to the legislation they really wanted to introduce but it's the thin end of the wedge. Now these may 'all make perfect sense to [you]" but they don't to me and I'll be out tomorrow hoping to demonstrate that.

And I see a lot of modified bikes out there that really shouldn't be allowed to be ridden on public roads full stop.

We already have laws to enforce vehicle construction and use and I'd like to suggest it's up to VOSA and the Police to enforce them rather than something being done based on what you think you see.

I'm quite happy to listen to your views, interested in what you have to say and happy to have this discussion but why don't we try to maintain it at a level where you don't feel the need to try to put words in my mouth like 'evil EU', or suggest I'm 'right wing', 'EU-bashing' and have a noisy exhaust that may or may not be tolerated in other countries? OTOH I'm happy to accept that the members here are happy with what is being proposed and I'll keep my right-wing EU-bashing views to myself!

Kevin

[Kawdolph]

there has been alot of motorcycle protests today here in ireland ,and there are more tomoroow

[Lonewolf]

So what tactics would you suggest may work? (Genuine question)
Kevin

Getting out of the EU for starters! I can remember the rolling road blocks by the HGV drivers in  2000 I think it was, to protest regarding the ever increasing cost of diesel. These protests worked, why did they work? I believe they worked because they made the Government sit up and take notice and secondly I believe there was huge support from the public. I was in the job at the time and I Policed some of these protests and at the time I had and still do have a great deal of admiration and respect for the way the protests were organised and conducted. The general public couldn't give two hoots about what restrictions are implemented on motorcyclists. I think the rolling road blocks down the motorways will hit the news, there will be some TV coverage, but by the middle of next week it will be yesterday's news and forgotten.
We are a minority as motorcyclists and as such we are no doubt going to be stung and made an example of in one form or another. I do hope that when these protests take place tomorrow everyone will be respectful towards other road users and that the protests conclude without incident which may show us in a bad light. I honestly don't know what tactics will work other than getting out of the EU.

[Cartman]

The EU needs to be held to account for it's proposals and each individual nation should examine them on their merits. The manufacturers like a lot of these proposals as they effectively ring fence franchised dealer servicing. The real consequence will be to individuals like us and small business providing service and after Market parts. Nothing that further constricts the economy will be tolerated anywhere in the EU.

There is a tangible difference between EU bashing and ensuring accountability, they are after all supposed to represent US!

I loathe any Nanny State measures, something the EU seems to specialise in, nor do I wish to be spoon fed legislation from Brussels. However laudable MAGs ideals may be previous experience has taught me that these protests have little or no effect, remember parking charges, and just irritate the box jockeys who need no more reason to dislike us.

[Cartman]

Oh and I do belong to MAG and BMF, I remember the proposal for compulsory leg guards.

[mecki]

Thanks Kevin for your lengthy reply.
First of all I take objection to the motto of the campaign "EU Hands off Biking".
And yes, that sounds to me like right-wing EU-bashing, sorry.
I never meant to imply any thing regarding your person.

As far as ABS is concerned I think it is a good idea to make it compulsory. It definitely saves lives, prevents injuries and damage to bikes and cars!
Linked brakes? Would you drive a car with separate brakes for front and rear wheels?
I don't think so. I now have a bike with linked brakes - and it is a real improvement.
And cost of safety is no argument at all.
All good safety equipment costs money.
If cost would be a factor then you could also claim having compulsory brakes or lights on a bike is too expensive for some people and stops them to ride a bike and therefore needs to be abolished too.

I don't know the local legislation of every EU country, but in Germany it was already prohibited to even change the brand, model and size of tyres without type approval over 30 years ago. So were and are modifications to air inlet (i.e K&N filters) and exhaust systems. Riding a modified bike is punished as operating a motor vehicle without registration and insurance, and believe me that is expensive and no minor offence.
Lower Emissions?
Yes, go for it! No excuse in my book that cats require sub-optimal engine mapping and lower performance as long as the output of poisonous gases is reduced.
And road side controls of bikes AND CARS are common on the mainland already, and they really love to especially pull so called boy racers and old cars (cops always find something wrong on an old rust bucket) over. Just ask the guys who drive souped up Golfs and the like how they get hassled by the police all the time.
So as you said so yourself (spin) - most of the stuff MAG are claiming is nothing but cheap propaganda.

And to LW - I think it would be great if the UK would get out of the EU.
The sooner the better.
Even though my reasoning may be totally different than yours. :-*
The rest of Europe will be happy to get rid of a permanent irritation and being ripped off due to the favourable conditions Thatcher negotiated.
Here in Newcastle alone they are burning more EU money for totally brain-dead projects than probably the whole of the UK is paying in.
So the local councillors and their cronies probably wouldn't be too happy about it. :-X
Unfortunately for you Brits you'll find out the hard way how quickly your friends on the other side of the pond will ditch you once you can't act as the "thorn in the side" of the EU any more. They're broke anyway and everybody knows how they treat their poor relatives.
And forget the Commonwealth - They don't want the "Poms" back either.
No more colonies and no German tax payers to bail them out. 8) I could nearly pity them. :-[

I wouldn't be surprised if British bikers would have to prove that their bikes comply with EU regulations if they want to ride them in the EU afterwards, though. ;D

[Cartman]

Hmmm not allowed to filter in Germany either, don't disagree about emissions and you make a good point about ABS. But your point regarding German legislation somewhat flies in the face of your 'one rule for all approach', who's rules should we follow in the United States of Europe? and who should run it?

If Germany and the EU are so wonderful and Britain is so awful why do you live in Newcastle?

We should stand against what we feel is wrong and inequitable, and although I don't agree with this particular method, I believe we need groups like MAG to keep the bureaucrats  in check and ensure we don't capitulate to EU pressure.