EDIT: CALLING THEIR BLUFF

Automobile makers must honour environmental norms

The Supreme Court’s verdict last week that the sale of vehicles meeting Bharat Stage-III (BS-III) emission norms won’t be allowed from April 1 caught the industry on the wrong foot. The industry had been asking for an extension of the April 1 deadline on the pretext that it was stuck with more than 800,000 vehicles — mostly two-wheelers and three-wheelers — but almost 100,000 commercial vehicles as well. But the twojudge bench that heard the matter struck down the extension plea as it felt the “health of the people is far, far more important than the commercial interests of the manufacturers”. The apex court deserves credit for not being swayed by the flawed argument presented by the industry.

The fact is that the road map for the upgrade from BS-III to BS-IV was clearly laid out. For new models, the new norms were supposed to come into effect from April 1, 2016. For the existing models, the industry was given 12 months to transit to BS-IV norms. This was done because companies needed to make investments in plant and machinery. To help manage the transition, the Environment Pollution (Prevention and Control) Authority (EPCA), a statutory body constituted by the central government in 1998 at the behest of the Supreme Court, had been working with the manufacturers since October last year. Yet, close to the deadline, the industry was seeking an extension, claiming huge inventory.

There are two broad reasons why allowing the extension would have been incorrect. For one, if allowed, it would have undermined policy credibility and adherence. Such a transition is neither the first one nor the last. An extension now would have laid down a pernicious precedent for the future when India intends to adopt BS-V and BS-VI norms. Moreover, the transition to BS-IV is not a new development — 13 Metro cities adopted this norm way back in April 2010. The second reason is how an extension would have penalised those manufacturers that followed the rules. For instance, Bajaj Auto, which had upgraded its factories to produce BS-IV vehicles, argued that companies such as itself were being priced out of the market because of the extra cost, and price, of such enhancement.

This is not the first time that automobile makers have shown their reluctance in upgrading to better safety and environmental norms. In the past, the Global New Car Assessment Programme, which carries out tests on the safety of motor vehicles, had found five Indian cars unsafe for passengers. Apart from a faulty body structure, most of the cars examined didn’t even have airbags, making them unsafe for occupants. The situation is improving but Indian cars are far removed from global safety norms. Manufacturers are unwilling to make investments in safety and environment protection, claiming that India is a highly price-sensitive market and any such upgrade bumps up the price, often the all-important criterion in choosing a vehicle. But this can hardly be an excuse to compromise on safety and emissions although it reflects poorly on Indian consumers’ priorities as well. The Supreme Court judgment should make automobile manufacturers wary of asking for an extension when the emission norms are upgraded next.