Motown didn’t slow down BS-III production?

India’s auto industry has a place of pride in the manufacturing sector. Even though it was shackled by regressive laws, it has emerged as a world-class sector in the last two decades. The auto component industry, the original equipment manufacturing ecosystem and global car companies have ensured that cars made in India are good enough to drive on any road in the world.

Domestic auto giants like Tata Motors and Mahindra Group have been ambitious enough to acquire global brands. While Tata Motors made a success of Jaguar Land Rover by acquiring it in 2008, Mahindra acquired Ssangyong Motors.

Industry body Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers (SIAM) has been fighting for the cause of growing the industry very effectively for years.

The sector accounts for over 7% of India’s GDP and has attracted foreign direct investment (FDI) of about $17 billion since the year 2000.

However, SIAM and the automakers have been consistently behind the curve on most issues of passenger safety and emissions. When catalytic convertors were forced on automobile makers in 1995, they cried loudly about the extra cost and the challenges in implementing it. Soon after, emission norms were announced but the industry dragged its feet on this front, toeing the line only after repeated judicial orders.

A similar situation developed when judicial intervention forced two-wheeler companies to install side-indicators. The two-wheeler makers were bitter about it and complained that buyers did not care for it.

When seat belts were mandated for cars, the industry again was upset and set out arguments against it. Their argument was the buyers in India did not want to pay for extra safety provisions. That Indian conditions shouldn’t be compared with western road laws.

The argument that Indian passengers can’t afford better safety norms is like saying that we should consumer sub-standard diet since Indians don’t care for hygienic food.

In recent years, the industry has dragged its feet on Bharat Stage (BS)-IV norms too.

The writing was on the wall for last two years about the deadline. But the industry kept running to the government and took the stand that the quality of fuel did not allow more stringent norms.

The industry has been accused of ramping up production ahead of the BS-III norms deadline. The Centre for Science and Environment says that most companies did not slow down production of BS-III vehicles and took no proactive steps to prepare for the transition.

Now to say that millions worth of stock will be unusable after the Supreme Court order to stop the sale of BS-III vehicles is little short of blackmail.

Other issues that the industry continues to hold back on are airbags in all models and also end of life policy for automobiles. Airbags are offered only for high-end cars while giving the excuse that Indian conditions justify it and passengers don’t want to pay for it. The end-of-life policy or recycling policy for old and unusable cars has been pending for years. The aggression shown by the industry in seeking deferral of emission norms deadline has not been visible for seeking a clear policy or investment in recycling. Globally, recycling is a multi-billion dollar industry. Rough estimates indicate that it could be worth $2.5 billion in India. SIAM needs to work harder on this to ensure a policy is created and investments are encouraged. It was only last year that government-run MSTC and Mahindra Intertrade have come together to create India’s first auto shredding plant.

At a time when electric cars are ready to transform the sector, Indian auto industry should become forward looking and be ahead of policy regulation.

Instead of being forced to adopt better emission and safety norms, the industry should be proactive for its sake and the sake of its consumers, and definitely for the environment and climate change.