The Observer view on SUVs: they are too dangerous and too big, their drivers should be made to pay
Britain is facing an unusual crisis: carspreading. Our road vehicles are getting bigger as people buy more and more SUVs of increasing dimensions and weight. At the same time, our streets and parking places remain the same size.
The consequences of this uncontrolled vehicular expansion have become profound. Potholes are being created in greater numbers as our roads are pounded by heavier vehicles; multiple parking spaces are being taken over by single, giant cars; and road accidents are now producing more severe injuries to drivers and passengers of other vehicles. This last issue is of particular concern.
A study by the European Transport Safety Council found that in a collision between a modest-size SUV (sports utility vehicle) weighing 1,600kg and a lighter car weighing 1,300kg, the risk of fatal injury decreases by 50% for the occupants of the heavier car but increases by almost 80% for the occupants of the lighter car. Similarly, pedestrians and cyclists are more likely to be killed if the car that strikes them has a bonnet that is higher off the road than average, a typical feature of an SUV.
The trouble is that sales of these vehicles are booming. In 2024, they accounted for 33% of all registrations, compared with a figure of only 12% a decade earlier. This dramatic change in the use of our roads has led organisations such as the campaign group Clean Cities to call for strict measures to be imposed on car owners. Their argument is straightforward. If a car generates more potholes in our roads, takes up more parking space and poses more danger to pedestrians, cyclists and other car occupants compared with smaller vehicles, then it is only fair that its owner pays more for driving that vehicle.
Paris has already introduced specific parking charges for SUVs. Drivers of these vehicles now have to pay triple the amount of those who drive regular cars. The mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, has indicated that he would support such a scheme for the capital and should be encouraged to pursue the idea with rigour. However, attempts to tackle the problem should not be confined merely to parking. At present, the owners of polluting vehicles have to pay more road tax, based on the carbon dioxide they emit, and drivers of more expensive cars, including electric ones, are also hit with an extra tax.
It may be that these measures will have to be expanded in future, with similar levies being imposed on the owners of SUVs and other vehicles whose sizes exceed specific dimensions.
Sign up to Observed
Analysis and opinion on the week's news and culture brought to you by the best Observer writers
after newsletter promotion
Avoiding such measures could allow a transport problem that has already reached significant levels to become a major crisis. It is an issue that now needs to be considered as a matter of urgency.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
14 hours ago
- Telegraph
Our politicians are the least serious in history – and that includes you, Nigel
This week an appalling case reminded us just how broken Britain is. We learnt that a 15-year-old boy killed elderly dogwalker Bhim Kohli while a female friend, aged 12, filmed it on her mobile phone. Both were laughing as the beloved grandfather lay dying in the street. How on earth can it have come to this? The case is emblematic of everything that has gone wrong – and continues to go wrong – in our fragmented, seemingly lawless society. We are led by complete incompetents: from police administering two-tier justice right the way up to our Prime Minister. It is little wonder there is a university course running in France on why the UK is such a failure. And Mayor of London Sadiq Khan's answer to our capital's woes, despite knife and other crimes soaring? Decriminalising cannabis. We knew Labour were not fit for purpose before they even took office, but this latest example of idiocy from City Hall really does sum up the problem with having hapless, careerist socialists anywhere near the levers of power. And now Reform UK appears to have imploded. Having abandoned the Conservative Party after an inept 14 years of governance, which left us with higher bills, higher taxes, higher NHS waiting lists and higher immigration, voters had hoped that Nigel Farage and his motley crew might bring the salvation Britain so desperately needs. Reform was meant to represent the alternative to 'uniparty' politics by ripping up the political rule book and restoring good old fashioned common sense. What we have learnt in the past 24 hours, however, is that the one thing uniting all four major parties in the UK (and I'm including the ludicrous Liberal Democrats in this, with their clown of a leader Sir Ed Davey) is just how thoroughly unserious they all are. Westminster currently resembles a cross-party circus act; what has the electorate done to deserve this? Let's take them one by one. We currently cannot believe a word slippery Starmer says after a string of Labour lies on tax, winter fuel, defence spending, relations with the EU, the Chagos Islands, immigration – you name it. They promised 6,500 more teachers with their vindictive VAT raid on private school fees and this week it was revealed teacher numbers are actually down since they took office. Millionaires are leaving, businesses are folding, more tax rises are on the way. We've got an Attorney General who wants to defend terrorists like Osama bin Laden's right-hand man while the justice system imprisons mothers like Lucy Connolly for 'hurty words' on the internet. The Left accuses Reform of being amateurs – and then run the country as if it's a university student union staffed by drop-outs. Yet the Right-wing opposition appears equally as childish. This week, we have had the shadow chancellor Mel Stride denouncing Liz Truss's premiership with some weasel words about the Tories 'never again undermining fiscal credibility by making promises we cannot afford'. The former prime minister – once famously compared to a lettuce – hit back with an excoriating statement on the political playground that is X, accusing Sir Mel of being a 'creature of the system' by siding with 'failed Treasury orthodoxy'. In what world does this blue-on-blue infighting help Kemi Badenoch as she struggles to cut through? Equally infantile was the typically boyish intervention of her former leadership rival Sir James Cleverly with a demand that the Conservatives stick to net zero – despite it being among the main reasons the party is now facing its own climate emergency. He's been invisible for months and then emerges with this sort of unhelpful Ed Milibandesque claptrap? Read the room, for pity's sake. All credit to Robert Jenrick for trying to find some grown-up solutions to some of the country's problems – like fare dodging, notwithstanding the self-serving nature of his attention-grabbing social media endeavours. Badenoch is trying her best to be a serious politician, with thoughtful rather than knee-jerk interventions on issues like our membership of the ECHR – only to have MPs in her ranks like Kit Malthouse spreading anti-Israel slanders like his declaration this week that Gaza is 'an abattoir where starving people are lured out through combat zones to be shot at'. Along with other Tories, he's also been calling for the Prime Minister to recognise a Palestinian state. Harebrained student politics are clearly not just confined to the Labour Party. We had hoped Reform, led by streetwise Nigel Farage, a man of political wisdom and experience, might rise above all this. But even he has been dogged by infantilism. If Rupert Lowe's 'more people watch my X videos than Nigel's' bravado wasn't bad enough, Reform now has been badly damaged by the similarly petulant flouncing out of party chairman Zia Yusuf. I like Zia and think he deserves credit for all the hard work he has put into professionalising the party over the past 11 months. But what on earth was there to be gained from such a public tantrum? Just leave quietly, don't blow the whole thing up with spiteful talk of working to get the party elected 'no longer being a good use of my time'. Similarly juvenile was the language he used to describe Reform MP Sarah Pochin's Commons call to ban the burka (which provoked laughter from the front bench: that's the state of public discourse in this country, folks). Responding to Katie Hopkins, of all people, on X, he wrote: 'Nothing to do with me. Had no idea about the question nor that it wasn't policy. Busy with other stuff. I do think it's dumb for a party to ask the PM if they would do something the party itself wouldn't do.' At the age of 38 and having worked at Goldman Sachs and established his own hugely successful business, he should know this is not the way to behave in the public eye. Reform remains a party that cannot even govern itself, let alone the country. This simply isn't good enough. The Government is useless, the Tories are a busted flush; if Reform seriously wants to break the doom loom of despair then it cannot be part of the problem. The party must get its act together – and fast.
BBC News
15 hours ago
- BBC News
London mayor urged to increase parking fees and tax on SUVs
Mayor of London Sir Sadiq Khan has been urged to seek to increase taxes and parking fees for Assembly Members agreed a motion calling on him to take action over fears the increasing size of cars is damaging roads, causing congestion and putting other road users at greater risk of death and serious assembly called on Sir Sadiq to ask the Treasury to amend vehicle excise duty to include a tax based on vehicle also wants the mayor to ask councils in the capital to consider charging more for parking larger cars, and to call on the Department for Transport to introduce stricter limits on the size and bonnet height of passenger vehicles. The motion was agreed by 14 votes in favour and eight have become more popular in recent years, with many drivers preferring the higher seating position. They accounted for a third of all new car registrations in the UK last year, compared with 12% a decade are generally taller, wider and heavier than traditional cars, and less size increase has been dubbed "carspreading".Labour London Assembly Member Elly Baker, who proposed the motion, said the capital's streets "weren't designed for larger vehicles like SUVs".She added: "Their greater size, weight, and higher bonnets put vulnerable road users at greater risk, reduce available parking spaces, and cause more wear and tear on our roads."It's time we took sensible steps to manage the impact of oversized cars and ensure our streets remain safe and accessible." AA president Edmund King insisted it was "up to Londoners to choose the type of vehicle that best fulfils their needs".He said: "It is not really the role of the London Assembly to dictate what cars individuals should drive."Some larger families may well need bigger vehicles with more passenger seats, whereas a driver conducting most trips alone may well choose a city car."London's streets were developed around the horse and cart, so of course our infrastructure needs modernising to keep up with change." A recent study found pedestrians and cyclists are 44% more likely to die if they are hit by an SUV or similar-sized vehicle rather than a traditional analysis by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) and Imperial College London stated the figure rises to 82% for children.A Mayor of London spokesman said: "The mayor, Transport for London and borough partners are working to eliminate deaths and serious injuries on our roads, by expanding the cycle network, making road crossings and junctions safer, reducing speed limits on our roads, and making larger vehicles like HGVs and buses safer."This year the mayor will be refreshing his Vision Zero action plan to restate his commitment to reducing road danger and responding to new and emerging risks on our roads."The Treasury has been approached for comment.
The Independent
18 hours ago
- The Independent
Sir Sadiq Khan urged to seek higher taxes and parking fees for SUVs
Sir Sadiq Khan has been urged to seek higher taxes and parking fees for SUVs. London Assembly Members agreed a motion calling on the mayor to take action because of fears that the increasing size of cars is damaging road surfaces, causing congestion and putting other road users at greater risk of death and serious injury. The London Assembly called on Sir Sadiq to ask the Treasury to amend vehicle excise duty to include a tax based on vehicle weight. It also wants the mayor to request that councils in the capital consider charging more for parking larger cars, and to call on the Department for Transport to introduce tighter limits on the size and bonnet height of passenger vehicles. The motion was agreed by 14 votes in favour and eight votes against. SUVs have grown in popularity in recent years, with many drivers favouring their higher seating position. They accounted for a third of all new car registrations in the UK last year, compared with just 12% a decade earlier. SUVs are generally taller, wider and heavier than traditional cars, and less fuel-efficient. The increase in the size of cars has been described as carspreading. Labour London Assembly Member Elly Baker, who proposed the motion, said the capital's streets 'weren't designed for larger vehicles like SUVs'. She went on: 'Their greater size, weight, and higher bonnets put vulnerable road users at greater risk, reduce available parking spaces, and cause more wear and tear on our roads. 'It's time we took sensible steps to manage the impact of oversized cars and ensure our streets remain safe and accessible for everyone.' But AA president Edmund King insisted it is 'up to Londoners to choose the type of vehicle that best fulfils their needs'. He added: 'It is not really the role of the London Assembly to dictate what cars individuals should drive. 'Some larger families may well need bigger vehicles with more passenger seats, whereas a driver conducting most trips alone may well choose a city car. 'London's streets were developed around the horse and cart, so of course our infrastructure needs modernising to keep up with change.' A recent study found pedestrians and cyclists are 44% more likely to die if they are hit by an SUV or similar-sized vehicle rather than a traditional car. The analysis produced by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) and Imperial College London stated that the figure rises to 82% for children. A spokesperson for the Mayor of London said: 'The Mayor, Transport for London and borough partners are working to eliminate deaths and serious injuries on our roads, by expanding the cycle network, making road crossings and junctions safer, reducing speed limits on our roads, and making larger vehicles like HGVs and buses safer. 'This year the Mayor will be refreshing his vision zero action plan to restate his commitment to reducing road danger and responding to new and emerging risks on our roads.'
