The report presented by Mr Barton was adopted.
This proposal completed the type-approval procedure and thus created the conditions necessary for establishing a single market for motorcycles in all the Member States.
Three areas were still the subject of some controversy, namely measures against tampering, noise levels and exhaust systems, and measures to reduce atmospheric pollution. As far as "tampering" was concerned, Mr Barton thought that restrictions should only apply to mopeds, as "tampering" with engines of this size could result in an increase in power from a vehicle which was fitted with an inappropriate level of safety equipment. The rapporteur therefore proposed to exclude the other categories of mopeds from the scope of the Directive (amendments 15 to 23). As regards noise pollution, where tampering resulted in an increased nuisance level, Mr Barton proposed further amendments (2 and 10) which would severely limit the possibility of manufacturing, importing or selling spare parts which would modify a motorcycle in such a way that it would no longer comply with the Directive. The Committee agreed with the rapporteur on these different points. As regards noise levels (amendments 24 and 14) the Members did not support the position of the rapporteur, who was proposing levels below those advocated by the Commission, since he was of the view that it was more important to ensure that requirements were met than to introduce standards which were even more strict. As far as measures to combat atmospheric pollution were concerned, Mr Barton believed that the stricter proposals being put forward by the Commission would result in a 20% increase in costs for small-capacity motorcycles, which could well deal a serious blow to this particular market. The Members did not support the rapporteur on this point and amendment 13 was rejected. As regards both tampering and noise and pollution levels the representative of the Commission stressed that the latter was strongly opposed to the amendments being proposed by Mr Barton, as this would completely reduce the impact of the proposal. In view of the reluctance displayed by certain Members, Mr Alan Donnelly (PSE, UK) recalled that the procedure was still in its early stages and that the rapporteur should be left some room for manoeuvre.
�