Andrew English's column

	In more than 20 years in the business, I've never seen such a complete Horlicks of decision making

OK, a battleship grey day in Belgium isn’t the Shangri-La of holiday destinations. But if you ever find yourself at a loose end in Brussels,
I urge you to take the 25-minute hike from the centre to the European Parliament. The exercise will do you good and prepare you with a fitting sense of righteousness to observe the organisation that Winston Churchill felt was wholly suitable for Continentals, but not us British.

Whatever you have heard about the eco heart of the great European project, no one walks to work. At least six months’ production-worth of premier-cru Mercedes endlessly circle the entrances. Every two minutes (I was there for two hours), a limo disgorges someone very important and very badly dressed. It was with this scene in mind that I finally found a bus to the Brussels Expo, home of the Cars and CO2 conference held by Acea, the organisation representing Europe’s car makers.

The EU wants manufacturers to reduce their current corporate average CO2
output of about 160g/km per vehicle to 130g/km by 2012, with an additional 10g/km reduction being provided by what the EU calls Complementary Measures. There are hefty financial penalties for those failing to make the cut... but nobody knows what Complementary Measures are, nor how they will be judged.

In theory they include biofuels, low-energy air-con systems and low rolling-resistance tyres, such as those fitted to the Peugeot 308 and credited with reducing its emissions by up to 4g/km. But if a car already benefits from such eco rubber, how will the EU isolate that CO2 benefit and remove it from the manufacturers’ share in the final count? No one knows. Not Ford, nor Vauxhall. And Toyota GB boss Miquel Fonseca admits his firm has delayed rehomologating its hybrid Prius down to potential CO2 emissions of 99g/km partly because of this uncertainty over the role of eco tyres. Even Michelin, which makes the 308’s energy-saving rubber, hasn’t much of a clue.

In more than 20 years in the business, I’ve never seen such a complete Horlicks of decision making. Indeed, Michelin’s PR man Patrick Ozoux suggests EU tyre rules are holding back the development of more environmental rubber, so car makers are having to select tyres with less than optimum rolling resistance, saying: “These European regulations put manufacturers in the worst possible position and the result is not virtuous for the environment.”

Michelin wants to change the system so car makers will get credit for fitting eco tyres in proportion to the CO2 they save. I imagined this might have made for a cracking debate when the EU director general of the environment and architect of the proposals, Morgens-Peter Carl came up to speak. Did it hell. Instead of addressing real concerns about his inexplicable proposals, this super Sir Humphrey sat back like a superannuated sausage and told his incredulous audience to get away from the attitude of: “Oh God please make me a saint, but not quite yet.”

The only chink of illumination came from ex-rally ace and MEP Ari Vatanen who attacked the proposals, his patronising colleagues and the profligacy of EU bureaucracy. “When I heard what the EU was proposing, I felt very sad,” he said. “This will never work as there are no incentives and the targets are unrealistic. Instead of battling the useless anti-car lobby, we need to make the car more efficient. At the moment, the fight to reduce CO2 in Europe is like a man who lost his keys on a dark night and is now looking for them under street lamps.” Forget Tony Blair – let’s make Ari the new EU president.