– having regard to the Commission recommendation of 8 September 2011 on support for an EU-wide eCall service in electronic communication networks for the transmission of in-vehicle emergency calls based on 112 (eCalls),
– having regard to Directive 2010/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2010 on the framework for the deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems in the field of road transport and for interfaces with other modes of transport(1),
– having regard to Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive)(2),
– having regard to the Commission Staff Working Paper ‘Impact Assessment’ accompanying the Commission recommendation on support for an EU-wide eCall service in electronic communication networks for the transmission of in-vehicle emergency calls based on 112 (‘eCalls’) (SEC(2011)1020),
– having regard to the Commission communication ‘Towards a European road safety area: policy orientations on road safety 2011-2020’ (COM(2010)0389),
– having regard to the Commission communication ‘A sustainable future for transport: Towards an integrated, technology-led and user friendly system’ (COM(2009)0279),
– having regard to the Commission communication ‘eCall: Time for Deployment’ (COM(2009)0434),
– having regard to the Commission communication ‘Towards Europe-wide Safer, Cleaner and Efficient Mobility: The First Intelligent Car Report’ (COM(2007)0541),
– having regard to the Commission communication ‘On the Intelligent Car Initiative – “Raising Awareness of ICT for Smarter, Safer and Cleaner Vehicles”‘ (COM(2006)0059),
– having regard to the Commission communication ‘Bringing eCall back on track - Action Plan’ (Third eSafety Communication) (COM(2006)0723),
– having regard to the Commission communication ‘Bringing eCall to Citizens’ (Second eSafety Communication) (COM(2005)0431),
– having regard to the Commission communication ‘Information and Communications Technologies for Safe and Intelligent Vehicles’ (COM(2003)0542),
– having regard to the Commission communication ‘European Road Safety Action Programme - Halving the number of road accident victims in the European Union by 2010: A shared responsibility’ (COM (2003)0311),
– having regard to the working document on data protection and privacy implications in eCall initiative (Article 29 Working Party – 1609/06/EN, WP 125),
– having regard to its resolution of 25 October 2011 on mobility and inclusion of people with disabilities and the European Disability Strategy 2010–2020(3),
– having regard to its resolution of 27 September 2011 on European Road Safety 2011-2020(4),
– having regard to the adopted written declaration on the need for accessible 112 emergency services(5),
– having regard to its resolution of 6 July 2010 on a sustainable future for transport(6),
– having regard to its resolution of 5 July 2011 on Universal Service and the 112 emergency number(7),
– having regard to its resolution of 23 April 2009 on the Intelligent Transport Systems Action Plan(8),
– having regard to its resolution of 19 June 2008 on the First Intelligent Car Report(9),
– having regard to its resolution of 18 January 2007 on the Third European Road Safety Action Programme – mid-term review(10),
– having regard to its resolution of 27 April 2006 on road safety:bringing eCall to citizens(11),
– having regard to its resolution of 29 September 2005 on ‘European Road Safety Action Programme – halving the number of road accident victims in the European Union by 2010: a shared responsibility’(12),
– having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,
– having regard to the joint deliberations of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection and the Committee on Transport and Tourism under Rule 51 of the Rules of Procedure,
– having regard to the ‘World report on road traffic injury prevention’ published jointly in 2004 by the World Bank and the WHO,
– having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection and the Committee on Transport and Tourism (A7-0205/2012),
A. whereas according to the prediction made by the World Bank and WHO, the number of traffic accident victims is expected to rise in every area of the world (from being the ninth to the third cause of death by 2020), and the lower mortality ranking for the 5-14 age group is also a hard blow for both parents and society;
B. whereas based on the data in the European Union for 2004, more than 40 000 people die every year in accidents and 150 000 people suffer permanent disability;
C. whereas the aim of the in-vehicle eCall system is to ensure the automatic notification of the emergency services in case of a serious accident, with the purpose of reducing road fatalities and alleviating the severity of road injuries by the earlier arrival of qualified and equipped assistance (the ‘golden hour’ principle);
D. whereas the eCall emergency call is generated automatically via the activation of in-vehicle sensors which, when activated, establish voice and data connection directly with the relevant Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs);
E. whereas, according to official statistical data on eCall, it is estimated that the full integration of the system in cars in EU Member States will save up to 2 500 lives annually, while also reducing the severity of injuries by 10-15 %;
F. whereas eCall provides benefit to road users, travelling within their countries or abroad, who may be unfamiliar with the roads and their exact location in the case of accident;
G. whereas eCall allows emergency calls to be made without language difficulties by virtue of the digital data enclosed in the Minimum Set of Data (MSD) message format, which is likely to reduce misunderstanding and stressand helps to eliminate language barriers between the vehicle occupants and the PSAP operator, which is important in the European multi-language environment;
H. whereas the deployment of an EU-wide eCall service available in all vehicles and in all countries has been a major priority for the Union in the context of road safety since 2002, and is included in the Road Safety Action Programme 2011-2020 as a means of improving road safety and contributing to the target of reducing the numbers of road deaths and injuries in Europe;
I. whereas Directive 2010/40/EU includes “the harmonised provision for an interoperable EU-wide eCall” among its priority actions and sets the obligation for the Commission to adopt, by the end of 2012, common specifications for the upgrading of the PSAPs;
J. whereas Member States remain responsible for the type of organisation for the PSAPs receiving the eCalls, be it a public organisation or a private organisation acting under public delegation;
K. whereas the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the Realisation of Interoperable In-Vehicle eCall in Europe has to date been signed by 22 Member States, 5 Associated States, and more than 100 organisations; whereas two more Member States have expressed their support to a mandatory deployment of eCall;
L. whereas Parliament has expressed its support for the introduction of eCall on numerous occasions, including support for its mandatory deployment, an initiative that will create a feeling of greater safety for citizens when travelling;
M. whereas a voluntary approach to deployment in the EU has been Commission policy since 2003 but has not achieved significant progress to date;
N. whereas in its 2009 communication ‘eCall: Time for Deployment’, the Commission indicated that if significant progress had not been made by the end of 2009 in terms of both the availability of the eCall device in vehicles and the necessary investment in the PSAP infrastructure, it would propose regulatory measures;
O. whereas according to the results of the public consultation carried out in 2010 by the Commission on the implementation of eCall, more than 80 % of respondents find the eCall system useful and would like their vehicle to be equipped with it;
P. whereas motorcyclists are the user group that can have the most difficulty in notifying the emergency services in the event of being involved in a road accident;
Q. whereas agricultural and industrial vehicles, particularly agricultural tractors, tend to operate in remote and isolated areas, and are therefore often unable to notify the emergency services in the event of an accident;
R. whereas private in-vehicle emergency call services exist today, and their deployment in Europe is increasing, but none of them offers full EU-wide coverage and market penetration is below 0.4 % of the vehicle fleet, while some of the services introduced have been dismantled due to market failures, leaving the user without in-vehicle emergency call service during the lifetime of the vehicle;
S. whereas numerous studies and projects based on scientific methodology underscore the positive safety effects of eCall;
T. whereas the technology is ready, and common EU-wide standards have been agreed on and are being refined and tested by industry actors and public authorities in the framework of pilot projects;
U. whereas the Commission publicly announced in 2011 that it would present, in the first quarter of 2012, a new regulation including eCall as an additional requirement within the motor vehicle type-approval regulatory framework;
1. Welcomes the Commission’s recommendation of 8 September 2011, and urges the Member States and the Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) to implement its requiredmeasures and upgrades at the latest by the end of 2014;regrets, however, that only 18 Member States responded in time; calls on the remaining Member States to do so as soon as possible;
2. Regrets the delays and lack of progress in the voluntary deployment of eCall to date and the fact that three Member States have not signed the eCall MoU or stated their support to the eCall deployment; calls, therefore, on those Member States that have not yet done so to sign the MoU on the development of a EU-wide interoperable eCall service in Europe, and urges all the parties involved to act simultaneously in order to establish this service.
3. Underlines the fact that significant gaps exist in the functioning of the European emergency number 112 on which eCall is to be based; calls on the Member States to address these gaps as a matter of urgency, and calls on the Commission to step up its monitoring in this regard;
4. Considers that eCall should be a public EU-wide emergency call system, embedded in the vehicle and based on 112 and on common pan-European standards to guarantee technology neutrality, in order to ensure a reliable,high-quality, affordable and user-friendly service that can work seamlessly and interoperably across the whole of Europe in all automobiles, irrespective of make, country or actual location of the vehicle, thus maximising the benefits of eCall for all road users, including disabled people with special needs;
5. Emphasises the positive effects of eCall, in terms not only of improving incident management, reducing congestion produced by accidents and avoiding secondary accidents, but particularly of speeding up the arrival of the emergency services and thus reducing fatalities and the severity of injuries resulting from road traffic accidents, thereby improving Europeans’ confidence when travelling in other Member States;
6. Considers that if the introduction of eCall is left to market forces, eCall will only benefit people who can afford high-end vehicles, whereas a mandatory introduction of the system embedded in all vehicles would lead to lower costs and universal, EU-wide deployment;
7. Recalls that the Commission’s impact assessment shows that the adoption of regulatory measures to enforce the mandatory introduction of eCall is at present the only option to achieve all positive effects;
8. Urges the Commission to submit a proposal within the framework of Directive 2007/46/EC in order to ensure the mandatory deployment of a public, 112-based eCall system by 2015 in all new, type-approved cars and in all Member States;
9. Considers that the public eCall service should be free of charge and obligatory, and should be installed in all new vehicles falling under the scope of this proposal;
10. Considers that the publiceCall service must be simple, affordable, operational and accessible to everybody throughout the EU, regardless of the vehicle and its location;
11. Rejects the idea that the implementation of the in-vehicle aspects of eCall could be phased in over an extended period of time;
12. Calls on the Commission to propose any other regulatory measure necessary to avoid additional delays that could result in preventable fatalities;
13. Considers that while the cost–benefit analysis (CBA) method can serve an important role in generating data on which to base complex decisions pertaining to investments and technology take-up, it can be of dubious merit when an important part of the analysis involves estimating the value of human life;
14. Calls on the Commission, while assessing the impact of the deployment of the eCall in the EU, to take into consideration not only the investment and operational costs but also the social benefits resulting from the deployment of the eCall;
15. Calls on the Commission to set up clear rules on the liability of stakeholders involved in the eCall system;
16. Calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of false alarms being generated by e-Call systems, the influence of such false alarms on daily emergency services, the need to distinguish both between serious and less serious accidents and between emergency signals and other information to be transmitted to the emergency services to ensure their efficient operation; calls on the Commission to propose concrete solutions on these problems, if necessary;
17. Welcomes the establishment of the European eCall Implementation Platform, and calls for relevant stakeholders and Member States representatives to participate to ensure a harmonised introduction of eCall;
18. Calls on the Commission to consider extending the eCall system in the near future to include other vehicles, such as heavy goods vehicles (HGVs), buses and coaches, and powered two-wheelers (PTW), and to assess whether it should be extended also to include agricultural tractors and industrial vehicles;
19. Considers that the use of aftermarket E-call devices should be allowed for existing vehicles;
20. Notes that ensuring that all PSAPs in all Member States are equipped to a high standard is essential if there is to be a uniform level of protection of all citizens throughout the Union, and therefore calls on the Commission to propose legislation requiring Member States to upgrade their emergency response services infrastructures, and to provide suitable training to operators, so as to be able to handle eCalls by 2015, in a way that is best suited to their national structures and that makes them accessible to everyone;
21. Urges the Commission to adopt the common specifications for PSAPs within the framework of the ITS Directive by the end of 2012, and to propose a directive on the implementation of eCall;
22. Appreciates the willingness of mobile network operators (MNOs) to handle eCalls like any other 112 calls, and suggests that they, along with the Member States, should report on a yearly basis to the Commission on the progress made and the difficulties encountered, in particular in relation to the eCall flag;
23. Welcomes the fact that the establishment of a voice connection between vehicle occupants and the PSAP operators handling emergency calls, allowing mutual communication, reduces both the risk of inappropriate responses and the unnecessary deployment of emergency services, such as in the case of a light accident;
24. Stresses that there is a growing need for a common data transfer protocol for forwarding such information to public safety answering points and emergency response services, in order to avoid the risk of confusion or misinterpretation of the data communicated; emphasises that the forwarding of information by mobile network operators to public safety answering points should be established in a transparent and non-discriminatory way;
25. Recalls that having electronic data in the PSAPs may also lead to additional advantages, such as advanced guidance for members of the rescue services to be informed properly about new sources of danger that they may face due to the development of electric cars and other new propulsion systems;
26. Considers that links between PSAPs and road operators for improving incident management should be promoted, in line with the recommendations of the European eCall Implementation Platform (EeIP);
27. Supports the intensive work done within the HeERO project (Harmonised eCall European Pilot) on the pilot cross-border authentication of eCall; calls on the Commission and on the Member States to increase cooperation between national PSAPs and emergency response services, in particular at cross-border points in Europe, and to encourage the development of joint training and exchanges of best practices, , with a view to improving the effectiveness of the entire emergency services supply chain;
28. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the eCall system, and the links to PSAPs, also are compatible with systems that interact with infrastructure and with intelligent onboard systems (such as intelligent safety barriers that warn of the possibility of accidents, intelligent onboard speed systems, etc.);
Private emergency call services
29. Considers that a public EU-wide eCall service can coexist with private emergency services, on the conditions that all performance standards are met by both public and private services, and that – regardless of whether or not a vehicle buyer opts for a private solution – all vehicles are equipped with the public eCall service so as to ensure continuity of the service in all Member States throughout the lifetime of the vehicle;
30. Stresses that the eCall system must be user-friendly, andemphasises that consumers should be offered a realistic overview of the system, as well as comprehensive and reliable information regarding any additional functionalities or services linked to the private, in-vehicle emergency or assistance-call applications on offer, and regarding the level of service to be expected with the purchase of such applications and the associated cost;
31. Requests that when a consumer that subscribes to a private emergency call service chooses not to use that service, or is travelling in a country where that service is not offered, the public 112 eCall serviceshould automatically be available;
32. Considers that private eCall service providers also have the possibility to migrate to the EU-wide eCall service at any time, while continuing to provide other call services;
33. Invites EU businesses to become involved in the development of the necessary eCall system applications, services and infrastructure, in order to stimulate EU-wide innovation;
34. Stresses the fact that the public eCall system must not under any circumstances allow the journey of a vehicle to be traced, signifying that it must remain a dormant system until an emergency call is triggered, in line with the recommendations of the Article 29 Working Party on Data Protection; recalls that the eCall service has the priority objective of improving incident management, and that data provided by the eCall service cannot be used in any way to monitor and study a person’s movements or determine his location unless that person has been involved in an accident;
35. Stresses that appropriate rules that respect transparency should be included for the processing of personal data relating to eCalls, not only by MNOs but also by all other actors involved, including vehicle manufacturers, PSAPs and emergency services, in order to ensure that the principles of privacy and protection of personal data are respected in accordance with European directives 95/46/EC and 2002/58/EC and with national legislation; stresses that any upcoming legislation should clarify the responsibilities, under Directive 95/46/EC, of the different actors involved in the eCall, as well as the modalities for providing information to data subjects and for facilitating the exercise of their rights;
36. Stresses that private eCall services must respect the principles of privacy and data protection, providing in particular for informed consent and the possibility of opting out, in line with the recommendations of the Article 29 Working Party; emphasises that consumers’ informed consent should be based on full information about the amount of data gathered and the purpose to which it is gathered, and that consumers should be able to withdraw their consent at any time;
37. Stresses that the owner or leasee of a vehicle should decide, as an informed consumer, who gets access to the data regarding private eCall services registered to the vehicle;
Other related fields
38. Emphasises that the eCall system utilises technical components (satellite positioning, processing and communication capabilities) that could also provide the basis for several other in-vehicle applications and services;
39. Considers that, in order to ensure open choice for customers, the eCall in-vehicle system should be accessible free of charge and without discrimination to all stakeholders such as providers of car aftermarket products and services, equipment suppliers, repair shops and independent service providers, roadside assistance and related services;calls on the Commission to ensure that the eCall system is based on an interoperable and open-access platform for possible future in-vehicle applications or services, in order to encourage innovation and boost the competitiveness of the European information technology industry on the global markets; stresses that any such applications and services shall remain optional.
40. Considers that open choice for customers and open access for service providers should become part of the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) in-vehicle platform design criteria, and that in-vehicle related interfaces should be standardised to allow fair competition and to encourage innovation in the European telematics market;
41. Stresses that any additional services to be used in a vehicle – especially when driving – will need to comply with clear safety, security and data protection privacy standards, and that compliance with such standards must be measured and controlled;
42. Recalls that the European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service (EGNOS) and Galileo can contribute significantly to road traffic management and emergency interventions, and this requires an information campaign to promote greater use of the opportunities that this system offers with regard to the eCall application;
43. Considers that Member States should be allowed to establish eCall filtering systems for PSAPs that allow the rapid identification of urgent calls, thereby avoiding call centres from being overburdened while increasing the efficiency of emergency services; considers that such efforts should be supported by the Commission;
44. Calls on the Member States, in cooperation with the Commission, to establish and run national pilot programmes to implement the automatic vehicle emergency response system (eCall) in order to identify possible problems, and to prepare the way for the mandatory implementation of the system in all Member States in 2015;
45. Requests that a standard eCall interface, a so called “eCall button”, which is easily identifiable also for persons with disabilities, should be inserted in all vehicles in order to avoid misunderstanding and possible misuse of the system; calls on the Commission and the European Standardisation Organisations to propose a harmonised standard for such manual triggering mechanism;
46. Calls on the Commission to assess the possible impact of eCall on public health systems expenditures; in this regard, calls on the Member States to agree on a harmonised definition of serious injuries;
47. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to step up their activities as regards providing extensive practical information through the development of a targeted and far-reaching communication strategy, and implementing coordinated awareness-raising campaigns, concerning the eCall system and its benefits, its use and its functionalities, also in terms of safety for EU’s citizens, with the aims of increasing both the public’s understanding of, and its demand for, such emergency services, and of minimising the risk that these service are misused or misunderstood;
48. Recommends that the Commission take care that the eCall service is interoperable with other similar in-vehicle emergency services promoted in neighbouring regions, such as the ERA-GLONASS service;
49. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the Governments and Parliaments of the Member States.
In the event of a severe road accident, an eCall-equipped vehicle will automatically trigger an emergency call. Even if passengers cannot speak, eCall creates a voice link to the closest Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) and sends an emergency message, known as the minimum set of data (MSD), including key information about the accident, such as time, accurate location, driving direction (resulting from accurate satellite-based data) and vehicle description. eCall can also be activated manually.
eCall does not prevent accidents, but improves the effectiveness of emergency services. When emergency services are promptly notified and know the accident location, they can arrive quickly and reduce the risk of death and the severity of injuries (‘golden hour’principle).
How does it work?
The mobile network operator (MNO) identifies that the 112 call is an eCall from the ‘eCall flag’ inserted by the vehicle’s communication module. The MNO handles the eCall like any other 112 call and routes the call to the most appropriate emergency response centre — Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) — as defined by the public authorities.
The PSAP operator will receive both the voice call and the MSD. The information provided by the MSD will be decoded and displayed in the PSAP operator screen. The location and driving directionof the vehicle can be shown in a Geographic Information System. At the same time, the operator will be able to hear what is happening in the vehicle and talk with the occupants of the vehicle if possible. This will help the operator ascertain which emergency services are needed at the accident scene (ambulance, firemen or police) and to rapidly dispatch the alert and all relevant information to the right service.
Furthermore, the PSAP operator will be able to immediately inform the road/traffic management centres that an incident has occurred in a specific location, facilitating rapid information to other road users and thus preventing secondary accidents, helping to clear the carriageway and therefore reducing congestion.
What is needed for the deployment of eCall?
Vehicle/equipment manufacturers should include an in-vehicle system capable of triggering the eCalls and gathering and bundling the Minimum Set of Data.
Mobile Network Operators should transmit the eCalls (voice and data) to the emergency call response centres.
Member States should upgrade their Public Safety Answering Points in order to handle the eCalls (voice and data).
What have been done so far?
The deployment of a pan-European eCall service available in all vehicles and in all countries was one of the high priorities identified by the Working Group of experts on Road Safety in 2002.
In 2003 the Commission included the deployment of a harmonised pan-European eCall service as one of the priorities of the eSafety initiative and supported the creation of an eCall Driving Group with participation of representatives of all the stakeholders, to define the requirements of such service.
The Group produced in 2004 a Memorandum of Understanding towards the elaboration of a pan-European interoperable eCall service in Europe (eCall MoU) and proposed a roadmap aiming at starting the voluntary introduction of eCall as standard option in all vehicles in Europe by the end of 2009. This document is voluntary and is intended to reflect the commitment of signatories to support to the timely implementation of eCall. Only 4 Member States have not signed the MoU.
eCall was also one of the priorities of the Intelligent Car Initiative launched in 2006 and of the Intelligent Transport Systems Action Plan. The Intelligent Transport Systems Directive includes “the harmonised provision for an interoperable EU-wide eCall” among the priority actions within the priority area ‘Road safety and security applications”.
In 2009 the Communication ‘eCall: Time for Deployment’ proposed a series of measures to support the voluntary introduction of the eCall service in all new road vehicles in Europe. The Communication indicated that if significant progress had not been made by the end of 2009, both in the availability of the eCall device in vehicles, and the necessary investment in the Public Safety Answering Points (PSAP) infrastructure, the Commission would plan to take regulatory measures.
The mandatory introduction of eCall
In line with this Communication the Commission decided in 2011 to take legislative action to introduce a mandatory eCall. This regulatory approach includes 3 measures:
1.- A Commission Recommendation adopted last September, where Member States are asked to define their Emergency Call infrastructure to receive the eCalls; and Mobile network operators are asked to implement eCall flag in their networks before end 2014 to handle eCalls like any other 112 call (free of charge and with priority in the networks).
The Recommendation is due to be followed by:
2.- Delegated act to be adopted by the end of 2012 under the ITS Directive setting common specifications upgrading of the PSAP infrastructure.
3.- Proposal for a regulation under the vehicle type-approval legislation for the mandatory introduction of the in-vehicle part of the eCall service in new type-approved vehicles in Europe.
eCall: a public service for the benefit of all Europeans
Your Rapporteurs consider that the mandatory deployment of a public eCall should not be based or made conditional on the existence of a positive business case for the standalone eCall service, as its benefits for society as a whole should also be considered.
eCall should be a public emergency call service, free of charge, for the benefit of any driver in Europe independently of his car brand.
Private emergency call services (TPS)
Private in-vehicle emergency call services started to be introduced in Europe in the late 90s. Proprietary in-vehicle emergency call services are offered today in Europe and worldwide by different automobile branches and service providers (e.g., Volvo, PSA, Fiat, BMW). They are typically bundled with other services, such as breakdown assistance, onboard mobile telephony, dynamic navigation, etc.
Emergency calls are received by private call centres that transmit the calls and the accident data to PSAPs in an emergency. Each manufacturer needs to reach an agreement with PSAP authorities in every country in which they want to deploy the service, on a case-by-case basis.
Although these services, introduced more than 10 years ago, have shown their usefulness, their penetration remains very low in Europe (less than 0.4 % of the vehicle fleet). The service is normally offered only in high-end cars and in countries where there is a clear business case.
TPS do not cover all countries in Europe, so when vehicles travel into countries where the service is not provided by the private party, the service is discontinued. Furthermore some of the services introduced in the past were dismantled due to market failures, leaving the user without in-vehicle emergency call service during the lifetime of the vehicle.
Your Rapporteurs believe that the EU-wide public eCall service based on the 112 emergency number and private emergency call services can coexist as long as the necessary measures to ensure the continuity in the provision of the service to the consumer are adopted.
Public and private added value services
With the deployment of a European-wide public eCall service future vehicles will be equipped with a basic in-vehicle telematics platform which will associate technical components (wireless communication with accurate positioning technology and a connection to car control and sensor systems) which could provide the basis for several in-vehicle applications.
Vehicle users, the automotive and the telecommunications industry could benefit from the provision of new services based on the presence of the eCall telematics platform and its associated ability to collect and present additional data to vehicles.
Therefore value-added services/applications, either free of charge or commercial, can potentially be added to the in-vehicle system initially designed for the public European eCall.
Your Rapporteurs believes that the integration of all these possible applications within a coherent, open-system architecture could yield better efficiency and usability, reduced costs and enhanced extensibility, enabling the integration of future new or upgraded applications. The definition of an ‘open in-vehicle platform’ concept is part of the ITS Action Plan.
Open in-vehicle systems granting choice for consumers and access not only for vehicle manufacturer steered service providers will stimulate the overall European telematics market and foster product diversity and innovation at affordable prices.
Therefore open choice for customers and open access for service providers should become part of OEM in-vehicle platform design criteria. Access to car infrastructure can be achieved through appropriate standardized interfaces.
Furthermore any additional services should be allowed only as far as they are not contradictory to safety and security of driving and they comply with agreed standards.
Any added in-vehicle application based on the eCall telematics platform should fully comply with the relevant regulations on data protection and privacy. In particular:
1. The purposes for which the data may be used shall be clearly spelled out in the individual contracts. The contracts should also clearly set out that the third party service provider is the controller of the relevant data and is bound by all the data protection and privacy obligations that pertain to data controllers under both the Data protection directive and national laws.
2. Only such data which are “necessary” and “relevant” for the specific purposes may be transmitted, i.e. it must be ensured that each third party provider only receives those data that are required for the purposes of the respective contract.
Use of nomadic devices as eCall
Although the provision of the eCall functionality could be achieved to a certain extent through the use of nomadic solutions (such as mobile phones), your Rapporteurs are very critical with their mandatory introduction for new type-approved vehicles, as these nomadic devices can be removed or be just forgotten to activate.
Benefits of eCall
The major benefit of eCall will be the reduction of the number of fatalities and the mitigation of the severity of injuries caused by road accidents due to faster arrival of the emergency services to the accident scene.
The shorter rescue time - faster arrival of rescue teams, police and towing firms- enables the accident scene to be cleared more quickly, eCall will thus reduce the congestion time and contribute to the efficiency of road transportation in Europe with a reduction of external costs.
For the public authorities the benefits of eCall are mostly demonstrated to be the reduction of a) the medical consequences of a crash, b) the risk of further accident on the scene, c) the impact of an accident on the traffic.
For the car industry the mandatory introduction of a public EU-wide eCall in all new type approved vehicles is going to open new opportunities for the deployment of additional value-added services using the eCall telematics platform.
In this respect several economic analysis on the impact of ecall introduction in Europe have presented the public eCall as the “enabler” for the take-off of many other commercial services which are ready to be offered into the market but still need a killer application to be successful. Therefore eCall could support additional public or private telematic services giving further safety and economic benefits.
RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE
Result of final vote
Members present for the final vote
Inés Ayala Sender, Georges Bach, Adam Bielan, Izaskun Bilbao Barandica, Philip Bradbourn, Cristian Silviu Buşoi, Antonio Cancian, Jorgo Chatzimarkakis, Birgit Collin-Langen, Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, António Fernando Correia de Campos, Michael Cramer, Luis de Grandes Pascual, Cornelis de Jong, Christine De Veyrac, Saïd El Khadraoui, Christian Engström, Ismail Ertug, Carlo Fidanza, Knut Fleckenstein, Jacqueline Foster, Vicente Miguel Garcés Ramón, Louis Grech, Mathieu Grosch, Małgorzata Handzlik, Malcolm Harbour, Jim Higgins, Juozas Imbrasas, Iliana Ivanova, Sandra Kalniete, Dieter-Lebrecht Koch, Ádám Kósa, Werner Kuhn, Eva Lichtenberger, Marian-Jean Marinescu, Hans-Peter Mayer, Gesine Meissner, Hubert Pirker, Dominique Riquet, Zuzana Roithová, Heide Rühle, Petri Sarvamaa, Vilja Savisaar-Toomast, Christel Schaldemose, Olga Sehnalová, Brian Simpson, Laurence J.A.J. Stassen, Keith Taylor, Róża Gräfin von Thun und Hohenstein, Silvia-Adriana Ţicău, Giommaria Uggias, Peter van Dalen, Bernadette Vergnaud, Dominique Vlasto, Artur Zasada, Roberts Zīle
Substitute(s) present for the final vote
Raffaele Baldassarre, Phil Bennion, Jürgen Creutzmann, Spyros Danellis, Ashley Fox, Zita Gurmai, Anna Hedh, María Irigoyen Pérez, Gilles Pargneaux, Alfreds Rubiks, Marc Tarabella, Salvatore Tatarella, Kyriacos Triantaphyllides, Kerstin Westphal