Awaiting committee decision
2018/2089(INI) Autonomous driving in European transport
Next event: Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading 2018/11/22 more...
Lead committee dossier: TRAN/8/13335
Legal Basis RoP 052
Next event: Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading 2018/11/22 more...
- Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading 2019/01/14
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Opinion | EMPL | ||
Opinion | IMCO | KOHN Arndt (S&D) | |
Opinion | ITRE | ||
Opinion | JURI | RADEV Emil (EPP) | |
Lead | TRAN | VAN DE CAMP Wim (EPP) | UJHELYI István (S&D), ZŁOTOWSKI Kosma (ECR), DELLI Karima (Verts/ALE) |
Legal Basis RoP 052
Subjects
Activites
-
2019/01/14
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
-
2018/11/22
Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading
-
2018/06/14
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Documents
Amendments | Dossier |
76 |
2018/2089(INI)
2018/09/06
IMCO
76 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the Commission’s communication on an EU strategy for mobility of the future; acknowledges its potential for all autonomous private and public means of road, rail, waterborne and air transport, the spill-over effects on many sectors and the new business models enabled by automated driverless mobility, which will bring benefits for companies with a view to making Europe a leader in vehicle technologies; draws attention also to its implications for users, including persons with special needs or disabilities and the visually impaired;
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Recital A A. whereas the rapid pace of technology development, both in the transport industry and in the robotics and artificial intelligence sector, will have a significant impact on the economy and society; whereas driverless vehicles will significantly change our daily life, will determine the future of worldwide road transport and will also significantly reduce transport costs and improve road safety; whereas the road transport sector could open the door to new services and modes and thus satisfy the growing demand for individual mobility and goods transport, and could even help revolutionise urban planning;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Recalls that technological innovations cannot solve, in isolation, environmental issues, and that studies have shown that autonomous driving could make congestion and pollution worse; calls on authorities to develop policies that will ensure that autonomous vehicles will increase and improve travel options for all citizens, without negatively affecting the demand for and investments in public transport.
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Takes the view that, in the light of the dynamic technological changes in the sector, there is a need to clarify who should bear the damage in the event of accidents caused by fully autonomous vehicles, and when the level of autonomy is such that the vehicle can operate either fully autonomously or be driven by a driver it must be established beyond a shadow of a doubt who the responsible party is in each specific scenario; calls therefore on the Commission to adapt the current EU legal framework and, if necessary, introduce new rules on the basis of which responsibility and liability are allocated;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Emphasises the fact that once available on the market, automated vehicles will have a deep impact on the distribution and consumption of consumer goods and there is an urgent need to assess this impact and provide measures to support the affected markets and people.
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Takes the view that, in the light of the dynamic technological changes in the sector, there is a need to clarify who should bear the damage in the event of accidents caused by fully autonomous vehicles; calls therefore on the Commission to adapt the current EU legal framework and, if necessary, introduce new rules on the basis of which responsibility and liability are allocated; calls also on the Commission to assess and monitor the possibility of introducing additional EU instruments to keep pace with developments in artificial intelligence;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Stresses the need for the EU to introduce as soon as possible a clear and innovative regulatory framework, so as to place Europe at the forefront of the market in driverless vehicles, maintain competitiveness and foster job creation and innovation;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Takes the view that, in the light of the dynamic technological changes in the sector, there is a need to clarify who should bear the damage in the event of accidents caused by fully autonomous vehicles; calls therefore on the Commission to adapt the current EU legal framework and
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Stresses that while high safety and security standards are necessary for societal acceptance, they must be proportionate to the level of technology that is already in existence;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Takes the view that, in the light of the dynamic technological changes in the sector, there is a need to clarify who should bear the damage in the event of accidents caused by fully autonomous vehicles; calls therefore on the Commission to carry out a thorough assessment, to adapt the current EU legal framework and, if necessary, introduce new rules on the basis of which responsibility and liability are allocated;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Stresses the need for comprehensive legislation to address liability issues and underlines the need for clear communication regarding the rights and obligations of drivers and operators.
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Underlines the risks pertaining to a growing mixed traffic among traditional and autonomous driving vehicles, thus calling for more on site tests in order to support future-proof Research & Development for public and private enterprises and bodies, but also to provide concrete data helping to duly adapt the civil liability rules.
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Points out that excessive safety and security standards could slow down the adoption of automated mobility and eventually cost more lives as autonomous vehicles tend to be much safer than human driven vehicles already today;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Underlines that a possible
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 c (new) 2c. Stresses that ethical aspects of pre- programmed actions of self-driving cars in the case of accident need to be addressed in public discussion and resolved by the legislator before their full acceptance in traffic1a; _________________ 1a Example: In a case when a car is about to hit a child who accidentally enter the road, should the automated car try to avoid the collision at all costs, which would include deliberate crash of the car causing harm or fatalities to its driver?
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Stresses that, according to the European Parliament resolution on Civil Law Rules on Robotics, there shall be no limitation of liability regarding the nature and extent of the damage to be compensated in order to guarantee adequate victim protection;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 d (new) Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Emphasises that clear information about the automated features of a vehicle must be made available to potential consumers before they acquire a vehicle and during its lifetime, and that a level playing field and fair
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Considers that an EU-level approach
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Calls on the European Commission to publish a legislative proposal on access to in-vehicle data and resources by the end of 2018; Emphasises that clear information about the automated features of a vehicle must be made available to potential consumers before they acquire a vehicle and during its lifetime, and that a level playing field and fair access to different market players offering repair and maintenance is essential to ensure fair competition, especially for independent SMEs;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Stresses the need to guarantee fair market access for independent automotive service providers in the area of the servicing and repair of autonomous vehicles; recalls that entities of this kind, including in particular part manufacturers and small workshops and service centres, are an important competitive element in the automotive market and have a positive impact on the availability and prices of these services;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the Commission’s communication on an EU strategy for mobility of the future; acknowledges its potential, the spill-over effects on many sectors and the new business models enabled by automated driverless mobility, which
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Recital A A. whereas the rapid pace of technology development, both in the transport industry and in the robotics and artificial intelligence sector, will have a significant impact on the economy and society; whereas driverless vehicles will significantly change our daily life, will determine the future of worldwide road transport and will
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Emphasises that
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Calls on the Commission to launch initiatives which address issues relating to changes that may arise in the demand for manpower; to that end invites the Commission to set out guidelines for the Member States on updating training and skills, with support from the European Social Fund and under other specific projects;
Amendment 21 #
3a. Underlines that the liability of manufacturers and operators of automated vehicles or vehicles containing automated parts needs to be clearly regulated and both consumers and third parties need to have proper rights and redress mechanisms.
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Takes the view that the idea of giving autonomous vehicles their own legal personality should be abandoned;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Calls for the utmost, i.e. state-of- the art, security against the collection, mining, tracking and transfer of data, no matter whether these affect driving routes, passenger information or else.
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Regrets that the Commission has not sufficiently addressed the issue of guaranteeing independent digital and automotive service providers access to data generated by autonomous mobility systems; recommends creating a precise legal framework and specifying which categories of information generated by the autonomous mobility sector will be treated as open data and made available in real- time mode, and which will be confidential;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Highlights the importance of users
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 c (new) 4c. Predicts that competition on the single market in the industry servicing autonomous vehicles could be put at risk if manufacturers make it difficult for independent repairers to access the systems installed in these vehicles; stresses that this market segment should be subject to the provisions of Commission Regulation 461/2010;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Highlights the importance of users being in control of all their personal data collected by connected and automated cars; emphasises the importance of the transmission and storage of data between vehicles and connected infrastructure being protected by a
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Underlines the need to consider amendments to the Vienna Convention on Road Traffic and to the Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals aimed at facilitating the deployment of fully autonomous vehicles;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Highlights the importance of users being in control of their personal data collected by connected and automated
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Underlines the need to consider amendments to the
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Points out that liability remains an important challenge for the manufacturers and designers of autonomous vehicles. Stresses that additional clarity and certainty in legislation regarding the autonomous driving should be implemented.
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Welcomes the Commission proposals to regulate the protection of vehicles against cyber-attacks and to equip autonomous cars with data recorders to help determine the cause of accidents; calls on the Commission to further clarify rules on the protection and sharing of the data collected by those vehicles and access to such data, while fully respecting the GDPR rules
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Affirms that technical standards adapted by different brands must not only be aligned with global guidelines, be drafted using a technology-neutral approach and ensure interoperability, but also must ensure the utmost security against any sort of hacking, skimming, intervention or supervision;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Welcomes the Commission proposals to regulate the protection of vehicles against cyber-attacks and to equip autonomous cars with data recorders to help determine the cause of accidents; calls on the Commission to further clarify rules on the protection and sharing of the data collected by those vehicles, including data that indirectly identify persons, and access to such data, while fully respecting the GDPR rules and enabling interoperability between systems; considers that the owners of autonomous vehicles should have access to the data recording their driving behaviours, in accordance with the GDPR but also for the purpose of their right of defence when their liability is engaged.
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Affirms that technical standards adapted by different brands must be aligned with global guidelines, be drafted using a technology-neutral approach and ensure interoperability; Stresses that international standards should be developed in order to ensure data security, privacy and liability when autonomous vehicles are used globally.
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 29 #
5. Affirms that technical standards adapted by different brands must be aligned with global guidelines, be drafted using a technology-neutral approach and ensure interoperability; stresses that the forthcoming UNECE Regulations on Cybersecurity and on Over-the-air software updates become a benchmark for future European legislation;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Highlights that the issue of setting standards and granting interoperability is key for future competition in the field of autonomous driving vehicles manufacturing; recommends the creation of independent trusted entities to retain the means necessary to provide services to the users of autonomous driving vehicles, such as maintenance and repairs, including software updates fixing malfunctions, vulnerabilities and security loopholes, especially in the case where such maintenance is no longer carried out by the original supplier; suggests creating an obligation for manufacturers to supply these independent trusted entities with comprehensive design instructions including source code, similar to the legal deposit of publications to a national library;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the Commission’s communication on an EU strategy for mobility of the future; acknowledges its potential and importance, the spill-over effects on many sectors and the new business models enabled by automated driverless mobility, which will bring benefits for companies and consumers with a view to making Europe a leader in vehicle technologies; draws attention also to its implications for users, including persons with special needs or disabilities and the visually impaired;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Recital A A. whereas the rapid pace of technology development, both in the transport industry and in the robotics and artificial intelligence sector,
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Underlines that autonomous vehicles are technologically complex and differ substantially from current motor vehicles on the road; for legal certainty, better safeguards of consumer rights and to prevent that unknown risks are borne by injured parties, it is necessary to have a review of the current EU legislative framework for liability rules and insurance for autonomous vehicles, addressing the limitations of laws as regards the shift in responsibility to the introduction of new rules for covering new types of risks.
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Welcomes the Commission's commitment to bringing forward a regulation on data recording instruments for automated vehicles as part of the review of the General Safety Regulation for motor vehicles with a view to clarifying who is deemed to be piloting the vehicle (driver or vehicle itself) in the event of an accident;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Acknowledges that data recorders and access to the recorder are an essential tool to clarify the actual cause of events leading to damage or incident; welcomes the Commission’s proposal published on 17 May 2018 to regulate data recorders for automated vehicles as part of the revision of the General Safety Regulation and Motor Insurance Directive to further address the issue of liability for automated vehicles in case of accident.
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Emphasises that to strengthen Europe's position as a leader on innovative mobility, Europe should quickly move forward. Therefore, a shared European strategy is needed to coordinate the developments made by different states.
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Notes that similar questions in relation to intellectual property rights and corresponding usage rights will arise in respect of artificial intelligence for the purpose of autonomous mobility as in other areas, such as proprietary or usage rights to code, data and inventions created by the artificial intelligence itself; considers, however, that
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Emphasises that prior to making them available on the market, automated vehicles, like many other products, need to undergo a prior ethical assessment and their functioning and characteristics should also take into account ethical aspects.
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Draws attention to the need, when drafting the new legislative framework on the regulation of autonomous mobility, to ensure that any obstacle to furthering technological progress, research and innovation can be overcome.
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Suggests that any European budgetary program for support of automated mobility should be accompanied by cost-benefit, value for money analysis which would also calculate dead-weight costs and opportunity costs created by the program;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Notes that data generated during autonomous transport are automatically generated and are by nature not creative, thus making copyright protection or the right on databases inapplicable.
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Suggests to simplify the Union regulatory policy for automated vehicles, as less burdensome regulation can determine the degree of co-financing of the whole project by the private sector;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Urges all stakeholders, Members States and authorities involved to cooperate in fostering innovation, in ensuring investment in infrastructure fit for automated mobility and in facilitating cross-border testing. Highlights the need to increase investments in undergoing adjustments of current infrastructure, building new infrastructure and also in improving connectedness of the European roads, stresses that digitalisation of the infrastructure requires more investments to contribute to automated mobility.
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Urges all stakeholders, including vehicle manufacturers, component suppliers and software and design services, as well as Member
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Urges all stakeholders, Members States and authorities involved to cooperate in fostering innovation, in ensuring investment in infrastructure fit for automated mobility and in facilitating cross-border testing; calls for investment in extensive research on artificial intelligence and ethics for autonomous and connected transport.
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Under this premise, urges all stakeholders, Members States and authorities involved to cooperate in fostering innovation, in ensuring investment in infrastructure fit for automated mobility and in facilitating cross-border testing.
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas the roll-out of autonomous vehicles, expected already in 2020, will bring considerable benefits, but also entails a variety of new risks, namely regarding road traffic safety, civil liability, cybersecurity, insurance, intellectual property rights, data protection and data access issues; technical infrastructure and standardization measures, skilled labour supply, whereas it is of crucial importance to ensure that the EU legal framework is suitable to appropriately respond to those challenges; together with public awareness and acceptance
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Warns that autonomous driving threatens to disrupt the job opportunities and lives of millions of workers in the transport sector, without also creating significant numbers of secure and quality jobs through innovation and new technology; recalls that the anticipated savings in labour costs should not be a pretext for a reduction in workers’ rights, pay, conditions and safety.
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Points out that the distrust of European citizens towards automated driving can be observed and therefore awareness campaign increasing confidence of the citizens should be put in place.
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Considers it a matter of urgency to introduce a clear legal framework clarifying issues of liability with regard to driverless vehicles;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Points out that th
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas the roll-out of autonomous vehicles, expected already in 2020, will bring considerable benefits, but also entails a variety of new risks, namely regarding civil liability, cybersecurity, intellectual property rights, data protection and data access issues; whereas it is impossible to predict the full extent of the long-term impact of autonomous mobility on jobs and the environment; whereas it is of crucial importance to ensure that the EU legal framework is suitable to appropriately respond to those challenges;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Points out that while the deployment of connected and automated mobility c
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Notes that the existing liability rules, such as Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July 1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products (the Product Liability Directive) and Directive 2009/103/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles, and the enforcement of the obligation to insure against such liability (the Motor Insurance Directive), were not developed to deal with the challenges posed by the use of autonomous cars and stresses that there is growing evidence that the current regulatory framework will no longer be sufficient or
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Points out that the deployment of connected and automated mobility can contribute to road safety, help to reduce road fatalities to zero in Europe by 2050, and favour lower emissions, social inclusion and overall transport efficiency;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Notes that the existing liability rules were not developed to deal with the challenges posed by the use of autonomous cars and stresses that there is growing evidence that the current regulatory framework especially with regards to liability, insurance policy, registration and protection of personal data will no longer be sufficient or adequate when faced with the new risks emerging from increasing vehicle automation, connectivity and complexity;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Points out that the deployment of connected and automated mobility can contribute to road safety, help to reduce road fatalities to zero in Europe by 2050 and traffic congestion, and favour lower emissions, social inclusion and overall transport efficiency and productivity; stresses that societal acceptance will be achieved only if the highest safety and security standards are guaranteed;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Stresses that autonomous mobility presents enormous challenges in connection with the potential threat to privacy, in particular as a result of the strict need for geolocation and constant monitoring of the movements of these vehicles; points out that the protection of privacy and sensitive data generated by autonomous vehicles should be an absolute priority, and should be guaranteed in such a way that is in line with the requirements of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Points out that the deployment of connected and automated mobility can contribute to road safety, help to reduce road fatalities to zero in Europe by 2050, and favour lower emissions, social inclusion and overall transport efficiency; stresses that societal acceptance will be achieved only if
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Takes the view that, in the light of the dynamic technological changes in the sector, there is a need to clarify who should bear the damage in the event of accidents caused by fully autonomous vehicles; there is a particular need to examine whether the view that a very small proportion of all accidents has so far been attributable to technical factors would justify a liability shift to producer responsibility which, as a risk factor which is independent of negligence, can be linked simply to the risk posed by bringing a self-driving vehicle onto the market; and there is a further need to examine whether specific road safety obligations on the part of the vehicle owner and instruction obligations applicable to the driver in each case might adequately compensate for this liability shift; calls therefore on the Commission to adapt the current EU legal framework and, if necessary, introduce new rules on the basis of which responsibility and liability are allocated;
source: 627.595
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
2018-09-12Show (7) Changes | Timetravel
activities/0/committees/2/date |
2018-06-27T00:00:00
|
activities/0/committees/2/rapporteur |
|
activities/0/committees/4/shadows/2 |
|
committees/2/date |
2018-06-27T00:00:00
|
committees/2/rapporteur |
|
committees/4/shadows/2 |
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Old
Rules of Procedure EP 052New
Rules of Procedure EP 52 |
2018-06-19Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
other/0 |
|
2018-06-16Show (5) Changes
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|