VIDEO
HIGHLIGHT
Log InSign up
Comisión Permanente Ordinaria de Asuntos Económicos, 18 febrero 2026
SummaryTranscriptChat

Comisión Permanente Ordinaria de Asuntos Económicos, 18 febrero 2026

Session Initiation and Agenda Overview

Opening Remarks

  • The session begins at 13:29 with five deputies present, confirming the quorum for the 52nd session of the Permanent Ordinary Commission on Economic Affairs.
  • A brief recess is announced, extended to five minutes before resuming discussions.

Approval of Previous Minutes

  • The chair announces pending motions for review related to file 23,110 concerning the Collaborative Private Transport Service Law. Discussions will continue after approving previous meeting minutes.
  • Minutes from sessions 50 and 51 are discussed and approved without further issues raised.

Discussion on Motion for Review

Introduction of Motion

  • The committee discusses motion number 200 regarding amendments to Article 8 of the Collaborative Private Transport Service Law presented by Deputy Manuel Morales Díaz.

Key Proposals in Motion

  • The proposed amendment suggests that vehicles used for collaborative transport should not exceed eight years in age, aiming to balance modernization with accessibility. This timeframe is deemed technically and socially reasonable.

Rationale Behind Age Limit

  • Vehicles older than eight years may incur higher maintenance costs and increased failure rates in critical systems such as suspension and safety features, impacting overall service reliability. Thus, setting an age limit aims to mitigate these risks while ensuring modern standards are met.

Arguments For and Against Motion

Support for Modernization

  • Advocates argue that limiting vehicle age promotes a more efficient fleet that meets contemporary safety standards while also addressing environmental concerns by reducing emissions from older vehicles. This approach seeks to rejuvenate the vehicle pool used intensively in transportation services without outright banning older models from general circulation.

Economic Implications

  • Concerns are raised about potential economic repercussions if regulations become too strict, which could lead to a decrease in available drivers and subsequently increase fares due to reduced competition within the market. This cycle ultimately affects consumers negatively as they bear higher costs for services rendered under stricter regulations.

Voting Outcome

Conclusion of Discussion

  • After sufficient discussion on motion number 200, voting commences with seven deputies present; two vote in favor while five oppose it, resulting in rejection of the motion for review concerning vehicle age limits within collaborative transport services.

Moción para Revisar la Votación sobre el Transporte Privado Colaborativo

Presentación de la Moción 2011

  • El diputado Manuel Morales Díaz presenta una moción para revisar la votación de la moción número 137-201, solicitando cambios en el primer párrafo del artículo 8 del proyecto de ley.
  • La moción se centra en que los vehículos utilizados en plataformas de transporte privado colaborativo no deben tener más de 9 años de antigüedad.

Argumentos a Favor del Límite de Antigüedad

  • Se plantea una decisión estructural sobre el tipo de servicio de transporte deseado, cuestionando si se busca un estándar mínimo o uno que mejore seguridad y calidad.
  • Un límite de antigüedad vehicular más estricto (9 años) podría elevar los estándares técnicos y mejorar la seguridad, dado que los vehículos más antiguos carecen de tecnologías modernas.

Importancia de las Tecnologías Modernas

  • Los vehículos recientes incorporan sistemas avanzados como frenado autónomo y alertas, que son cruciales para reducir accidentes en carretera.
  • Estos sistemas no son meros adornos tecnológicos; son herramientas efectivas para prevenir colisiones y otros incidentes graves.

Consideraciones sobre Seguridad Vial

  • En el contexto del transporte público, donde los vehículos pueden estar llenos, la tecnología es vital para mitigar distracciones y evitar tragedias.
  • Los vehículos modernos tienen estructuras mejoradas que absorben energía durante choques, lo cual es fundamental para proteger a los ocupantes.

Evaluación Técnica del Límite Propuesto

  • Un vehículo con menos de 9 años está diseñado bajo estándares más estrictos en comparación con modelos anteriores, lo cual es un hecho técnico relevante.
  • La probabilidad de fallas mecánicas aumenta con la edad y el uso intensivo; por lo tanto, establecer un límite es crucial desde una perspectiva técnica.

Revisión Adicional: Moción 202

Presentación de la Moción 202

  • Se presenta otra moción por parte del diputado Morales Díaz para revisar nuevamente la votación anterior relacionada con el artículo 8.

Cambios Propuestos en esta Moción

  • Esta nueva moción propone cambiar el límite máximo a 10 años para los vehículos utilizados en servicios colaborativos mediante plataformas tecnológicas.

Balance entre Seguridad y Realidad Económica

  • La propuesta busca encontrar un equilibrio entre las necesidades económicas y las exigencias de seguridad sin causar un impacto negativo significativo en las familias dependientes del transporte colaborativo.

Vehicle Safety and Regulation Discussion

Evolution of Vehicle Safety Standards

  • The discussion highlights that multiple airbags have transitioned from being a luxury feature to a standard requirement in vehicles, reflecting advancements in safety technology.
  • It is noted that the difference between allowing vehicles aged 10 years versus 15 years is significant, with older vehicles posing greater risks due to accumulated wear and tear.
  • The conversation emphasizes the importance of driver experience alongside vehicle age, suggesting that inexperienced drivers may increase risk levels regardless of vehicle condition.

Economic Viability and Market Impact

  • A proposed limit of 10 years for vehicle age could expand the market for used cars, making them more accessible while preventing price inflation caused by high demand for newer models.
  • Excessive regulation could lead to a mass exit of drivers from the system, reducing competition and potentially increasing fares for consumers.

Legislative Review Process

  • The assembly discusses motion 23110 regarding collaborative private transport services, indicating ongoing legislative efforts to refine regulations affecting this sector.
  • Deputy Manuel Morales Díaz introduces a motion aimed at revising previous decisions on vehicle age limits for transportation services.

Balancing Safety and Socioeconomic Factors

  • The new proposal suggests setting an upper limit of 11 years for vehicle age while maintaining safety standards; it aims to facilitate a gradual transition without compromising public safety.
  • Key considerations include road safety, environmental impact, and socioeconomic realities; achieving balance among these factors is deemed crucial.

Technological Advancements in Vehicles

  • Vehicles manufactured after 2015 are highlighted as having significant technological improvements that enhance safety features compared to older models.
  • Electronic Stability Control (ESC), which can reduce accidents significantly, is emphasized as a critical feature present in newer vehicles.
  • The discussion concludes with recognition that removing older vehicles from intensive use can improve overall road safety without abruptly disrupting service availability.

Discussion on Vehicle Age Regulations in Transportation Services

Importance of Vehicle Age Limitations

  • The discussion highlights that corrective costs for vehicle maintenance increase significantly after 10 years, particularly affecting suspension, steering, and electronic systems.
  • A preventive limit at the 10-year mark is proposed to address issues before they become critical, balancing economic impacts for drivers.

Legislative Review Process

  • A motion was presented to review the voting outcome regarding a transportation service law (expediente 23110), indicating ongoing legislative discussions.
  • The proposal suggests increasing the maximum vehicle age from 10 to 12 years for private collaborative transport services.

Regulatory Framework and Safety Considerations

  • Emphasis is placed on establishing clear regulations for passenger transport to ensure safety, data protection, and transparency in service delivery.
  • The need for defined responsibilities among platforms, drivers, insurers, and the state is stressed to handle potential issues like accidents or disputes effectively.

Clarity in Definitions and Responsibilities

  • Key terms such as "platform," "remunerated transport service," "associated driver," and "authorized vehicle" require precise definitions to avoid misinterpretation during legislation.
  • Assigning clear responsibilities is crucial; this includes addressing who will be accountable in various scenarios involving passengers.

Balancing Technical Proposals with Social Responsibility

  • The proposal aims not only for technical compliance but also social responsibility when acquiring vehicles over 12 years old.
  • Recognizing the impact on employment and family stability underscores the importance of thoughtful legislation that considers all stakeholders involved in transportation services.

Dynamic Policy Development

  • Establishing a principle that vehicle age is a valid regulatory criterion allows for periodic reviews by authorities like MOP and COSEVI every three years.
  • This approach promotes dynamic public policy that adapts based on national conditions while enhancing Costa Rica's international image regarding sustainability and safety standards.

Discussion on Legislative Procedures and Revisions

Inquiry on Approval Process

  • A deputy questions the rationale behind discussing motions for revision after the approval of the minutes, indicating confusion over procedural integrity.
  • The deputy emphasizes that if the minutes are approved, it implies that prior votes on substantive motions are final, raising concerns about revisiting these motions.

Explanation of Procedural Norms

  • A technical services colleague clarifies that despite the approval of minutes, previously submitted revision motions must still be addressed as per legislative protocol.
  • The explanation references Article 155, which states that revision motions should be considered immediately following the approval of minutes.

Presentation of Revision Motion

  • A motion for review regarding a specific economic issue (motion number 205) is presented by Deputy Manuel Morales Díaz.
  • The motion seeks to amend Article 8 concerning vehicle age limits for collaborative transport services.

Arguments Supporting Vehicle Age Limit Change

  • Deputy Morales argues for a new limit of 13 years for vehicles used in collaborative transport to enhance service quality while remaining competitive regionally.
  • He stresses that this standard will improve user experience and align with environmental regulations by ensuring newer vehicles meet emission standards.

Implications of Proposed Changes

  • The deputy highlights potential public health benefits from reduced emissions and improved air quality due to newer vehicles being utilized in transportation.
  • He warns against overly aggressive restrictions which could lead to job losses among drivers reliant on these platforms, advocating for a balanced approach to regulation.

Economic Considerations and Market Dynamics

  • Morales discusses how a sudden drop in vehicle age limits could create financial strain on drivers and increase informal market activity due to high costs associated with newer vehicles.
  • He notes Costa Rica's unique challenges such as an aging vehicle fleet and limited access to financing options, arguing for gradual changes rather than abrupt shifts in policy.

Voting Outcome

  • Following discussions, the proposed revision motion is put to vote but ultimately rejected with two votes in favor and four against.

Discussion on the Ley del Servicio de Transporte Privado Colaborativo

Introduction of Moción 206

  • The session begins with the reading of a motion regarding the Ley del Servicio de Transporte Privado Colaborativo, presented by Deputy Manuel Morales Díaz. The motion seeks to review the voting outcome of a previously discussed motion (number 137).

Key Arguments for Vehicle Age Limit

  • Deputy Morales emphasizes that the proposed reform in Moción 206 aims to limit vehicles used for collaborative transport services to a maximum age of 14 years. This is based on concerns about vehicle wear and tear due to intensive use.
  • He notes that unlike personal vehicles, which may only be used for limited hours daily, collaborative transport vehicles experience heavy usage leading to increased maintenance costs after ten years.

Safety Considerations and Maintenance

  • Morales argues that while 14 years is a preventive measure, it does not mean all older vehicles are unsafe. Proper maintenance and rigorous technical inspections can ensure safety even for older models.
  • He highlights that vehicle age is an indicator of risk but stresses that deterioration isn't linear; significant risks typically arise after 15 years.

Technological Advancements in Vehicles

  • Vehicles from model year 2012 onward incorporate essential safety technologies such as ABS systems and electronic stability control, making them safer options for collaborative transport despite their age.
  • These advancements include high-strength steel structures and mandatory airbags, which enhance passenger safety during operation under various conditions.

Voting Outcome and Further Proposals

  • After discussion, the proposal was put to vote but was rejected with two votes in favor and five against.

Introduction of Moción 207

  • Following this, another motion (Moción 207) was introduced by Deputy Morales aimed at revising vehicle age limits again within the same legislative context.
  • This new proposal suggests raising the maximum vehicle age limit from 14 to 15 years while maintaining strict documentation requirements for operational compliance.

Conclusion on Vehicle Age Impact

  • Morales concludes that allowing vehicles up to 15 years old could still maintain acceptable safety standards without compromising public transportation quality or increasing accident risks significantly.

Discussion on Vehicle Safety and Regulations

Importance of Detecting Errors in Vehicles

  • The detection of any errors in vehicles is crucial as it can prevent accidents. Poor response capability from drivers can lead to significant accidents affecting both vehicle users and pedestrians.

Age Limit for Vehicles

  • A proposed maximum age limit for vehicles is set at 15 years, meaning only vehicles from 2011 or newer should be allowed. Older vehicles may lack essential safety technologies like airbags and advanced braking systems.

Environmental Standards

  • Vehicles older than 15 years may not meet current environmental standards, which could negatively impact public health due to emissions and noise pollution.

Technical Review Frequency Proposal

  • A motion was introduced to require all collaborative transport service vehicles to undergo technical reviews at least twice a year, regardless of their age. This aims to enhance safety by preventing potential accidents.

Usage Patterns of Collaborative Transport Vehicles

  • Unlike personal cars used occasionally, collaborative transport vehicles operate under intensive conditions, accumulating significantly more mileage (40,000 - 60,000 km per year), leading to accelerated wear and tear on critical components such as brakes and suspension systems.

Mechanical Wear Insights

  • Intensive use leads to non-linear mechanical wear; components like brakes may need adjustments every 15,000 - 20,000 km. The context of Costa Rican roads exacerbates this issue due to poor infrastructure.

Impact of Road Conditions on Vehicle Maintenance

  • The quality of Costa Rican roads contributes to faster deterioration rates for vehicle parts. For instance, shock absorbers can lose efficiency after just 25,000 km under local driving conditions.

Brake System Concerns

  • Studies indicate that brake pads can wear out within 20,000 - 30,000 km in high-use scenarios. This highlights the urgent need for regular maintenance checks for safety in transportation services.

Discussion on Vehicle Safety Regulations

Overview of Voting Process

  • The assembly is in the process of voting on a motion regarding vehicle safety regulations, specifically related to brake fluid and inspection frequency. The discussion has concluded, and voting is initiated.

Review of Motion 208

  • A review of motion 208 takes place with seven deputies present; however, only six are counted due to one absence. The motion is ultimately rejected with four votes against and two in favor.

Proposal for Technical Review Frequency

  • Deputy Manuel Morales presents a new motion (209) advocating for more frequent technical inspections for collaborative transport vehicles, suggesting they should occur biannually instead of annually. This change aims to address safety concerns based on wear patterns observed in vehicle components.

Justification for Increased Inspection Frequency

  • Morales cites studies indicating that critical vehicle components experience significant wear within six months under typical operating conditions in Costa Rica, emphasizing the need for timely inspections to prevent failures. He references data from engineering associations supporting this claim.

Impact of Environmental Conditions

  • The discussion highlights how Costa Rica's high humidity and temperature contribute to accelerated wear on vehicle parts, necessitating more frequent maintenance checks as proposed by the new motion. Statistics show that environmental factors can increase component degradation by up to 40%.

Conclusion of Voting Process

  • Following discussions about various motions related to transportation laws, another vote occurs where the proposal is again rejected with two votes in favor and five against, leading to further deliberations on upcoming legislative actions concerning transportation safety regulations.

Voting Process and Revisions in Legislative Assembly

Overview of Voting Procedures

  • The assembly discusses a motion that has been sufficiently debated, indicating readiness to initiate the voting process.
  • Deputy Moreira reports on the presence of seven deputies, with two votes in favor and five against, resulting in the rejection of the motion.
  • Another motion for review is presented regarding a previously voted motion (137-214), which is also deemed sufficiently discussed before proceeding to vote.