I agree that my comment was a bit snarky. Thing is, I'm getting tired of people dismissing 'bureaucrats' that easily. I know little about road safety legislation, but I know enough about the EU to state that they commonly have very smart subject matter experts work on legislation. Does that mean things always turn out perfect? Far from it. But 'idiot bureaucrat' is way too cynical for my taste.
EU has a huge revolving door problem, especially in automotive, which is a major industry in its (now declining) economic champions.
They might have people with credentials working for it, but the implementation described falls into the category of "some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe it." To an external observer, incompetence and malice are hardly distinguishable, especially when there is a huge economic incentive for both the automakers and legislators to be evil.
It's safety profiteering, squeezing millions in the name of saving lives.
The motivation of a bureaucrat isn’t the effectiveness of the policies they produce, but instead the political ramifications of those policies.
The safety minded “take no risks” at all approach has been if not popular, tolerated because it’s hard to argue against safety, even if the safety gains are dubious, and expensive. And so they keep their jobs.
Fast forward a few decades of this, and now nothing much new can be developed.
But of course the bureaucrats are “smart” so they’re never to blame.
Frankly they deserve the ire they get for being part of the problem. When is the last time they got rid of an ineffective rule in the EU?
