[NPV]

This seems like a negotiating tactic / veiled threat by Maruti. If there's any car manufacturing company in India that has mastered the art of extracting the most from the laws (or the lack of them) and trying their best to arm twist the government, it is Maruti, so they know what they're doing and will try all ways possible to avoid such mandates being imposed.

Maruti made a killing using the FAME schemes with their mild hybrid SHVS system and also by not providing even the basic 2 front airbags in their lowest variants till it was mandated back in 2017/18!

Maruti has huge volumes in the lower segments and those are their bread and butter models helping them with their massive market share and it's ironic if they even consider exiting these segments.

[rahulskumar]

If 6 air bags are made mandatory for all variants, the demand for top end will diminish and manufacturers will lose out on profit. I had to shell out for seltos gt line as this was the only option from Kia that came with 6 airbags, else I would have happily settled down on any of the mid variants. Even govt may lose out revenue with the new rules, as they earn a lot of taxes on top variants.

[AJ56]

Originally Posted by lordrayden

Up until the govt mandated ABS from April 2019, even some mid-market cars wouldn't offer this absolutely essential safety feature across all variants. I remember that many cars would only offer ABS in the top variants with the sticker "ABS" marking proudly displayed on body somewhere.

My 2013 Amaze has ABS and EBD, it’s not a top model and neither is it mid market, it was one of the cheapest cars you could buy back then, I believe the second cheapest automatic (after A star) in the market.

Point being, the buyers even at the very base of the market had an option to buy a car with ABS if they so chose. Without any mandates.

[BHPjunkie]

Well this is just stupidity by the government. By just making 6 airbags mandatory you don't expect safer roads. The entire safety issue is right down to handing over a drivers license to the infrastructure of roads.

In India you can get a drivers license without even visiting an RTO. What does the government do to ensure who they are handing over a driver's license is fit to drive? I have a friend in Dubai who is giving his fourth driving test to get a license.

Second, the infrastructure. In Mumbai, for example, U-turns are taken from the right most lane which is suppose to be the fast lane. Worst is you are getting on to the other side of the road in the fastest lane. The basic infrastructure of properly laid road is missing. I have driven extensively in Europe and once in USA. They way the road are designed in itself ensures lesser accidents. They have separate lanes for turns and U-turns. While joining a motorway there is a good 200-300 meter stretch before you merge with the traffic. Has anyone gone mid-way on to the Mumbai - Pune expressway, it spells DISASTER!

Thirdly, the government run buses, taxis and 3 wheelers. These guys think they own the roads. They are downright rash and observe no traffic discipline whatsoever.

So Mr. Gadkari, if you really want safer roads, stop going after manufacturers, instead improve your own country's infrastructure first.

[buzzy_boy]

I'm from the opposition bench, but I have the utmost respect for the current transport minister. He has brought in important customer centric legislation.

I agree with Mr. Bhargava that making six airbags mandatory for small cars does not make sense. However, I don't see why Bharath NCAP shouldn't be made mandatory. The government is not saying that all cars should meet a certain star rating. Mr. Bhargava is just worried that Maruti's customers will move to other brands if a bunch of their cars get zero stars.

[sreejithkk]

Originally Posted by NPV

and also by not providing even the basic 2 front airbags in their lowest variants till it was mandated back in 2017/18!

Except Toyota and VW/Skoda, none of the manufactures were providing dual airbags in their base models. Maruti actually had a optional variant like Lxi(O), Vxi(O) with dual airbags (though elusive), where other manufactures never provided that option as well. In the premium hatch back segment, other than Polo, it was Baleno that started providing dual airbags as standard. (Jazz E, S variants and i20 variants up to Sportz were not providing even driver airbag at all initially).

[AZT]

I would agree with Mr. Bhargava here. His reasons may be profit centric, but as a company they will just pass on the costs down to the buyer. And, since this is across the board, it will be be price hikes everywhere. Maruti, with its efficiency will still be able to price cars the lowest.

Ideal solution would be a middle ground where cars below a certain monetary value (5 - 7 lakhs) and meeting the defined definition of a hatchback should be taxed lower. We talk about how cars are depreciating assets and loans should be avoided but are reaching a stage where thats the only option for many salary drawing people. Car makers also deal with inflation so prices are anyway trending up, even without this rule.

[KPR]

I will agree with Mr. Bhargava. Many Indian families still travel in Splendors and Activas. They aspire to own atleast an Alto or Wagon R one day and for them that 0 star car is still safer than a two wheeler. Already Alto is costing close to 5 Lakhs on road today and a safe Tiago costs 7 Lakhs on road. Extra safety means they have to shell out few more lakhs. So buying a car is only going to get delayed for those aspirational class of people.

[man_and_machine]

There is denial, then resistance, then acceptance. The result is either adapt and live, exit and live or perish. I guess we are past the denial phase now. It's the resistance phase. So many more of such comments from different areas will come in. Some one else will second this view. The over all view is the safety norms like emission norms are only going to get stricter.
Companies dropped the diesel trains when BSVI came in. So its was exit and live for many, VAG in this case, some took the butter and adopted M&M for instance. Small cars will have lower margins for sure. The used cars might hot up a little, but with the 15 years scrap policy this will soon cool down too. It's an overall change in the environment, and everyone has to adopt. Even customers will have to adopt to higher prices to own their first car at an entry level.
We can't just hold other factors more responsible for deaths and say fix something else before the 6 air bag rule. Each interventions has its own benefit and priority and implementation practicality. While the govt. might do it part to make roads better, some responsibility will be on the manufacturers too, and some on the part of the drivers. Tomorrow a rash driving or speed driving might cost 10 times more, as an intervention for drivers. More combinations of these might come in.
One fact is for sure, this is a one way street.

[sharad_kmc]

Maruti has always been known to be cost effective or rather built to a cost. The government in its infinite wisdom dictates various rules across different industries for enforcement. I fail to understand how having 6 airbags is bad. In event of a crash the vehicle is insured and replaceable, unlike the occupant's lives. True in a free market economy the consumer and manufacturer should get a choice, but are all average consumers safety conscious enough to make the informed choice.

[chinkara]

Originally Posted by AJ56

I’m all for safety (don’t even drive without rear passengers belted up) but I’m not for mandating safety as that raises costs and is therefore directly related to a free market economy.

But that influences choices available. If 95% of the market doesn't want airbags I will not get a car with airbags even if I want one. The OEM will not give that option.

So as someone above said, a nudge is needed from time to time.

I think 6 airbags is too much though - 2 mandatory with more optional is needed. Regulation can mandate that a 6 airbag option needs to be provided rather than every car should have 6 airbags.

Also - on safety - what is missed is that majority of casualties are pedestrians and bikers. So what is needed is better access control, road discipline etc., I saw some research which said that less than 10% of the fatalities in India would have been prevented with 6 airbags. Let me see if I can dig that out.

[Deepak7745]

Originally Posted by TusharK

According to Nitin Gadkari, Minister for Road Transport & Highways, India has barely 1% of the vehicles across the globe but records 10% of the world’s road deaths. The 6 airbag norm was proposed with an aim to make Indian roads safer.

Source: ET Auto

Link to Team-BHP News]

Agree to the Minister's point of improving safety(need of the hour), but will just a mandatory 6 airbags translate to any real-time safety? Certainly not. Would welcome mandates specific to Crash safety ( min. 4 Stars for a car to be sold), well-marked medians/speed breaker, lane discipline, illegal parking, arrest cattle movement, etc. with increasing the airbags we are just trying to come out of a mishap( most probably not) rather to makes road safer we have other key points to be addressed.

[ishan12]

Originally Posted by AJ56

Yes to all of your points above, if airlines or movie theatres stop safe practices and remove safety equipment to cut costs, you will see an increase in fatality/injury from plane crashes and fire accidents at theatres respectively, causing these companies to lose business, no sane company will cut costs if it results in a loss of sales as patrons will leave them for safer options. Read up on Milton Friedman to fully understand the argument being made.

Milton Friedman? haven't read anything from him. But if these ideas are coming from him, I am glad that governments and policy makers across the world are not following him. Human life in a developing country like ours is already cheap, and if this was to to be followed, it would become a dumping ground for unsafe products and services and people would die left, right and center just for trying new stuff or going to new places or travelling with a new air/ rail/ bus operator.
Just because someone wrote something in a book, doesn't mean that it has to be right/ followed. I would not name any books/ writers here, but we all know that there are books that have contributed to killing of millions and destroyed entire countries.

[AJ56]

Originally Posted by chinkara

But that influences choices available. If 95% of the market doesn't want airbags I will not get a car with airbags even if I want one. The OEM will not give that option.

So as someone above said, a nudge is needed from time to time.

I think 6 airbags is too much though - 2 mandatory with more optional is needed. Regulation can mandate that a 6 airbag option needs to be provided rather than every car should have 6 airbags.

Also - on safety - what is missed is that majority of casualties are pedestrians and bikers. So what is needed is better access control, road discipline etc., I saw some research which said that less than 10% of the fatalities in India would have been prevented with 6 airbags. Let me see if I can dig that out.

That’s the point entirely, if 95% of the market doesn’t want a particular safety feature, the mfg should be under no compulsion to provide it by the gov. If consumers want a particular feature (safety or otherwise), they vote with their wallet and any mfg that doesn’t listen will lose sales.

Otherwise why stop at 6 airbags, why not mandate auto emergency braking, traction control, belt bags, active whiplash protection, hill hold, driver knee airbag and even pedestrian airbags, this mandatory safety argument leads nowhere. Let consumers decide that’s all.

100% agree with the last one, we have much improvement to make in public infrastructure.

Originally Posted by ishan12

Milton Friedman? haven't read anything from him. I would not name any books/ writers here, but we all know that there are books that have contributed to killing of millions and destroyed entire countries.

Friedman was an American economist and statistician who received the 1976 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his research on consumption analysis, monetary history and theory and the complexity of stabilization policy.

In other words a free market libertarian, it’s interesting you mention Marxism, he’s the farthest public intellectual you could find (along with Ayn Rand possibly) from a collectivist theory or worldview. And as is apparent in his work, he wanted less government control not more.

[chinkara]

Originally Posted by AJ56

That’s the point entirely, if 95% of the market doesn’t want a particular safety feature, the mfg should be under no compulsion to provide it by the gov. If consumers want a particular feature (safety or otherwise), they vote with their wallet and any mfg that doesn’t listen will lose sales.

The point is the government can nudge the OEM to provide a 6 airbag version for the person to whom safety is important. It may sell only 5-10% of that version (and with due premium), but it should be there. Otherwise market forces tend to focus on the 80% and not provide better features for safety etc.

It need not mandate all cars to have 6 airbags - but it can mandate that the car should have provision to accommodate 6 airbags if the customer so desires (after paying extra for it).