10. The expert from Finland reiterated his proposal (GRSP-66-08) on the possibility to have three-point safety-belts in M2 and M3 categories of vehicles. The expert from OICA argued that provisions on the fitting of safety-belts for buses are already in place in UN Regulations Nos. 16 and 80 (Strength of seats and their anchorages (buses)). The expert from EC clarified that for buses only the two-point belt fitting was mandatory on non-exposed seats. However, EC expert recommended that mandatory fitting of three-point safety-belts should be coupled by mandatory fitting of safety-belts reminders. The expert from Spain confirmed the statement of the expert from EC and informed GRSP that during the discussions within the IWG on how to secure children in buses, the group highlighted problems related to the use of two-point safety-belts. The expert from OICA recommended a real-world accident data approach to avoid lengthy discussion without any reasonable solution in sight. The expert from the Netherlands also recommended verifying accident data to provide basis for discussion. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this subject at its May 2021 session.

11. Finally, GRSP agreed to defer discussion (GRSP-66-08) on the possibility to have three-point safety-belts in M2 and M3 categories of vehicles, to its December 2020 session.

11. GRSP resumed discussion on ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2023/29 which complements ECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/2023/27 on safety-belt anchorages and removes derogations for two-point safety-belts on buses and coaches. The expert from Finland, author of the proposals, informed GRSP that he could not provide global statistical data, due to a lack of resources, to justify his proposal as requested by GRSP at its December 2023 session to justify his proposal. The expert from Australia stated that he supported in principle the proposal. However, he added that the lack of worldwide statistical evidence hamper a world view of the situation. The expert from CI that the removal of two-point safety-belts would ease to secure children in buses. The expert from Sweden supported the proposal. The expert from the Russian Federation stated that three-points safety-belts would be better than the two-points safety-belts and proposed to further the benefits through studies. He also proposed to verify the benefits of adjusting the height of effective upper anchorage point to accommodate occupants of different sizes. The expert from Italy argued that the three-points safety-belts could be detrimental. The expert from Germany questioned the effectiveness of the three-points safety-belts in buses. He explained that the majority of injuries in buses were from flying objects or due to ejection outside of the occupant compartment during crashes. The expert from France informed GRSP that three-points safety-belts reduce injuries in the event of frontal impacts. However, he added that 50 per cent of accidents in buses were caused by roll over and in these cases three-points safety-belts would cause neck injuries. Finally, GRSP agreed to resume discussion on this topic waiting statistical studies voluntarily provided by the expert from France and Sweden.

13. The expert from Finland introduced GRSP-70-06 and GRSP-70-07 justifying the introduction of three-points safety-belts on buses. The expert from the Netherlands supported the initiative. The expert from EC stated that he was open to consider the proposal but would like to see the initiative paired with safety belt reminders to ensure maximum benefit. The expert from Sweden supported the initiative from Finland. However, she asked for more about negative consequences, especially about occupant evacuation. The expert from OICA supported the need for accident data from other regions and review them carefully before drawing conclusions; he also noted that it would be useful to review the UN Regulation No. 80 requirements before deleting the possibility of two point-belts, which would have huge consequences. GRSP finally agreed to resume discussion on the proposal of the expert from Finland on the basis of broader data at its next sessions.

14. GRSP agreed to defer discussion at its December 2021 session on GRSP-66-08, concerning the possibility to have three-point safety-belts in M2 and M3 categories of vehicles.

15. GRSP resumed discussion on the mandatory fitting of 3-point safety-belts on buses and coaches. The expert from Finland introduced a presentation (GRSP-71-07) justifying the introduction of 3-point safety-belts on buses and proposing an official document for the December 2022 session of GRSP to remove the lap belt derogations from the UN Regulations Nos. 14 (Safety-belt anchorages) and 16. He clarified that his intention was not to amend UN Regulation No. 80 but to amend UN Regulations Nos. 14 and 16. The expert from OICA underlined that it was relevant to investigate what the driver should do in situations when a passenger was not wearing a safety-belt. He suggested that the issue be addressed to the expert of the International Road Union on the consequences of driver’s operators. He also recalled to GRSP the cost benefit analysis introduced by the expert from Finland (GRSP-70-07) at the December 2021 session of GRSP. He argued that analysis was the result of a low number of vehicles and data, and he requested more data from accidents. The expert from United Kingdom proposed data from his country. GRSP agreed to resume discussion at its December 2022 session on the basis of a proposal tabled by the expert from Finland, concerning the mandatory fitment of 3-point safety-belts on buses and coaches. GRSP also agreed that the proposal would be supported with statistical data on accidents linked to this subject, provided by the contracting parties to show evidence of the safety issue addressed by the expert from Finland.

19. The expert from Finland introduced GRSP-66-08 suggesting discussions on the possibility to have three-point safety-belts in M2 and M3 categories of vehicles. GRSP agreed to further discuss this issue at the next meeting.