Price of safety

The latest crash test results of London-based independent body Global NCAP (New Car Assessment Programme) — the third such test in a little over two years — yet again underlines how passenger safety comes low in the priority list of car manufacturers as they slug it out in the marketplace. The fight for customers happens over everything ranging from mileage, engine power, styling and looks, seating comfort to pricing but seldom over safety features. That most models today come with a base variant stripped of safety features such as airbags and anti-lock braking systems (ABS) tells a tale in itself — of buyer ignorance, manufacturer complicity and regulatory apathy. To Global NCAP should go the credit for creating awareness on the relatively poor safety features of cars on Indian roads, when it came out with its first review in January 2014 (followed a few months later by a second one) which showed that most popular models failed basic crash tests. Apart from exposing safety flaws, the tests also highlighted the lax vehicle safety standards prevailing in the country.

While the Government woke up to the issue and decided to frame its own standards called Bharat NCAP, it gave the industry a long leash in the matter of implementation. Thus, all new vehicles introduced from October 2017 will have to pass stringent frontal and side impact crash tests while existing models get time until October 2019 to meet the new norms. When asked about vehicle safety, the common refrain among car companies is that their models meet Indian safety standards. But if the safety standards are so lenient that even basic safety features are not mandatory, should car companies play coy and meet only those norms? Why can’t they raise the bar voluntarily and offer airbags and ABS across all models and variants, especially given that an airbag costs less than $100 and with volumes the cost will drop further? Volkswagen, for instance, decided to make airbags standard fitment on all its models after the Polo failed Global NCAP’s 2014 test.

Instead, what we see is manufacturers quibbling over minutiae such as the speed for the crash test (56 kmph is the norm but Global NCAP tested the models at 64 kmph) or accusing lobbies of safety equipment manufacturers for creating a fear psychosis among car buyers. Such lobbies would have done their job if in the end lives are saved by safety equipment installed in the vehicles. Another familiar argument is that vehicle costs will rise if higher safety norms are implemented, putting off customers. Yet the fact is that costs of safety components will drop if you take into account scale economies, and anyway, costs should not matter when it comes to saving human lives. If the argument is about competition, then the answer is that regulatory changes will even the field for all players and nobody will gain competitive advantage. Offering products superior on safety is the social responsibility of vehicle manufacturers; they ought not to wait for regulatory compulsion to do that.

COMMENT NOW