logo
Putting the brakes on the 2030 petrol and diesel ban may be backing British businesses, but not British air quality

Putting the brakes on the 2030 petrol and diesel ban may be backing British businesses, but not British air quality

Independent07-04-2025

After the to-ing and fro-ing of previous governments on precisely when they would finally ban cars with internal combustion engines, Keir Starmer 's team have now confirmed that the sale of new purely petrol or diesel cars will be banned from 2030 – as promised in last year's Labour Party manifesto.
This comes as the result of over 600 responses to the government's recent consultation on its Zero Emissions Vehicles (ZEV) Mandate and the proposed 2030 ban. As well as a mountain of paperwork to plough through, government ministers listened to industry representations – which is always nice to hear.
The result was announced late on Sunday evening, with one element being welcomed by pretty much everyone, and the other leaving a couple of car makers in particular feeling rather smug.
Let's start with the ZEV Mandate, which this year stipulates that at least 28 per cent of each manufacturer's cars and 16 per cent of its vans should be fully electric. Next year that rises to 33 per cent for cars and 24 per cent for vans, with further increments up to 66 per cent and 58 per cent respectively in 2029.
For every single car that misses those targets, manufacturers were in danger of being fined £15,000 per car this year. That has now been dropped to £12,000.
Not that it matters. There have been various workarounds including banking credits, buying credits and borrowing credits from future years, and they've all been tweaked to help avoid what could be crippling fines, especially when car makers are spending so much to incentivise people to buy EVs.
For the record, I think the government has done the right and reasonable thing there. But then there's the 2030 ban.
After what I can only assume is significant lobbying from Toyota and Nissan – both with sizeable workforces in their UK factories building hybrid vehicles – the government has decided that these hybrids can live on in showrooms from 2030 until 2035.
That's a bad move in my book, for a number of reasons.
Here's what transport secretary Heidi Alexander has said: 'We will always back British business. In the face of global economic challenges and stifled by a lack of certainty and direction for too long, our automotive industry deserves clarity, ambition and leadership. That is exactly what we are delivering today.
'Our ambitious package of strengthening reforms will protect and create jobs – making the UK a global automotive leader in the switch to EVs – all the while meeting our core manifesto commitment to phase out petrol and diesel vehicles by 2030.
'Once again, the prime minister's decisive and bold actions show how we're on the side of British business while harnessing the opportunities of the zero emissions transition to create jobs and drive growth, securing Britain's future, and delivering our Plan for Change.'
If the plan is to make the UK 'a global automotive leader in the switch to EVs', why is the government allowing the continued sale of petrol-powered full hybrids beyond 2030?
A battery electric vehicle emits zero CO2 from its tailpipe. A hybrid Toyota Corolla emits between 100 and 108g/km of CO2 depending on model, while a Nissan Qashqai with the e-Power hybrid powertrain emits from 117g/km of CO2. Plug-in hybrids are considerably more efficient with lower CO2 outputs.
Clearly the government has been under pressure from Toyota and Nissan – two brands that are way off the pace when it comes to electrification, with only one EV each in their current line-ups. Would Toyota and Nissan pack up shop and leave the UK if the government banned the sale of new full hybrids from 2030? Not a chance – the cost of closing a factory and replacing its output with a new one elsewhere is enormous.
Nissan is putting the new electric Leaf, Juke and Qashqai models into its Sunderland plant over the coming years and Toyota should – and probably will, eventually – be doing the same.
You can't knock a government that seems so keen to support British industry at such a crucial time, and the tweaks to the ZEV mandate are both sensible and welcome. But when it comes to banning the sale of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030, allowing full hybrids is the wrong move.
To me, it looks like the government has taken the appeasement option here, pleasing some of the people some of the time. If it really wants the UK to be 'a global automotive leader in the switch to EVs', it should have been stronger, only allowing new cars with plugs to be sold from 2030 onwards.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

How The Cheapest Toyota In America Compares To Its Honda Rival
How The Cheapest Toyota In America Compares To Its Honda Rival

Auto Blog

time7 minutes ago

  • Auto Blog

How The Cheapest Toyota In America Compares To Its Honda Rival

The cheapest new Toyota is motoring at its most sensible. Can The Cheapest Toyota Match Its Honda Rival? Toyota has its fair share of models that cost well over $50,000, from the three-row Sequoia to the Tundra pickup and GR Supra sports car. But, the automaker has not forgotten its roots as the ideal car for the everyday commuter who prioritizes good value above all else. For them, Toyota remains one of the go-to automakers in America, but what is the cheapest new Toyota car you can buy, and how does it compare to its chief rival from Honda? The Cheapest New Toyota Is The Corolla LE For only $22,325, the base Toyota Corolla LE sedan is the most affordable model sold by the brand in the United States. That price excludes any optional extras and the destination charge. Not only is it the cheapest Toyota, but it's one of the most affordable new cars in America, too. The Corolla LE comfortably undercuts its main rival on price, that being the Honda Civic Sedan, which starts at $24,250. You'll also pay less for a Corolla sedan than a Corolla hatch, with the latter beginning at $23,780. Let's take a closer look at what the Corolla LE gets you for your money. Inoffensive Exterior Styling, But Very Few Available Extras Source: Toyota The current Corolla sedan isn't as bland as previous iterations of the sedan. In particular, the front fascia is quite aggressive by Corolla standards, featuring wraparound headlight clusters and a substantial opening below the grille. All that being said, Toyota's cheapest car can't conceal its bargain price. It rides on exceedingly plain 16-inch steel wheels with covers, although alloys are available as part of a package. In standard white, it gives off an unavoidable rental car vibe, but at least you can upgrade to some more interesting colors for no charge, such as Blueprint. Autoblog Newsletter Autoblog brings you car news; expert reviews and exciting pictures and video. Research and compare vehicles, too. Sign up or sign in with Google Facebook Microsoft Apple By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. The only noteworthy standard exterior features are LED headlights and taillights. Then again, much the same is true of its Honda rival. An Ergonomically Sound Yet Basic Interior Inside, the Corolla LE comes with standard cloth seats in a choice of Light Gray, black, or Macadamia/Mocha. Honda limits the base Civic to an all-black interior, so at least the Corolla has a bit more variety here. Traditional analog gauges are fitted, but at least there are no legibility concerns. In the LE, the infotainment setup includes an eight-inch touchscreen, six speakers, and wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, so all the basics are covered. Toyota also includes four USB-C ports (two in front and two at the back), automatic single-zone climate control, and a 60/40 split-folding back seat. Toyota's Safety Sense 3.0 suite is smartly included as standard, and includes: Pre-collsion system with pedestrian detection Lane departure alert Automatic high beams Road sign assist Full-speed range dynamic radar cruise control Proactive driving assistance Blind-spot monitoring and cross-traffic alert are optionally available. The base Corolla has more USB ports, a slightly larger touchscreen, and two extra speakers when compared to the pricier Civic. The Civic's main advantage is a more accommodating back seat. Overall, the Corolla LE's interior lacks some desirable items and nicer finishes, but there are no glaring omissions when one considers the car's low price. Besides, you can always upgrade to one of the Corolla's many better-equipped trims. Performance: Efficient And Comfortable, But Zero Fun Factor Source: Toyota All non-hybrid Corollas use a 2.0-liter naturally-aspirated four-cylinder engine producing 169 horsepower and 151 lb-ft of torque. A CVT sends what limited power there is to the front wheels, and customers should be prepared to deal with some undesirable acoustics from the four-pot, together with languid acceleration. The Civic isn't any better in this regard (150 hp), so we suggest the base 191-hp Mazda 3 sedan for anyone in need of better performance; this also happens to be the cheapest Mazda on sale. On a more positive note, the cheapest new Toyota is highly efficient, returning 32/41/35 mpg city/highway/combined. It also rides comfortably and handles proficiently, but the Civic and Mazda 3 are both more involving to drive. It's hard to beat the base Corolla for sheer reliability and low running costs, but the underpowered engine and CVT transmission combination is perhaps the clearest sign that this is a budget car. Other Affordable Toyotas For just a bit more than the Corolla LE sedan, here are two other cheap Toyota cars worth considering. Toyota Corolla Hatchback: $23,780 Source: Toyota Much of what we've covered about the base Corolla Sedan also applies to the cheapest Corolla Hatchback, which starts at $23,780. However, the hatchback gets a sportier base trim called the SE, which comes with 16-inch alloy wheels, a color-keyed rear spoiler, and a leather-trimmed steering wheel. It sticks with the 169-hp engine, but has a much more youthful look and feel. Toyota Corolla Cross: $24,135 Source: Toyota Also Toyota's cheapest SUV, the base Corolla Cross L starts at just above $24k. It has the same 169-hp engine and a comparable specification to the Corolla LE. Being a crossover does mean a bigger back seat and a larger (24 cubic feet) trunk, though, which are the main reasons to choose this cheap Toyota instead. About the Author Karl Furlong View Profile

MoD ‘dishonest' to call 1994 Chinook crash an accident, say families
MoD ‘dishonest' to call 1994 Chinook crash an accident, say families

Western Telegraph

time23 minutes ago

  • Western Telegraph

MoD ‘dishonest' to call 1994 Chinook crash an accident, say families

RAF Chinook ZD576 was carrying 25 British intelligence personnel from RAF Aldergrove in Northern Ireland to a conference at Fort George near Inverness when it crashed in foggy weather on June 2 1994 on the Mull of Kintyre, Scotland. All 25 passengers – made up of personnel from MI5, the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the British Army – were killed, along with the helicopter's four crew members. The families of those who died said earlier this month that they were beginning legal action against the Ministry of Defence (MoD) for not ordering a public inquiry. They want a High Court judge to be able to review information which they say was not included in previous investigations, and which they believe will shed new light on the airworthiness of the helicopter. The families, who have coalesced into the Chinook Justice Campaign, said failing to order a public inquiry is a breach of the UK Government's human rights obligations. An MoD spokesperson said: 'The Mull of Kintyre crash was a tragic accident, and our thoughts and sympathies remain with the families, friends and colleagues of all those who died. 'We have received a pre-action protocol letter from the Chinook Justice Campaign and are considering our response. Therefore, it would be inappropriate to comment further.' Solicitor Mark Stephens, who is representing the families, said: 'The statements issued by the Ministry of Defence in recent days are so blatantly at odds with the facts as we now know them that they have caused immense upset to the families and cast a further cruel and disgraceful shadow on this ongoing travesty of justice. 'We know that the RAF helicopter carrying the 29 service personnel who were killed, serving their country, had been grounded because of fatal flaws in the software on board. 'For the MoD to claim that this was a 'tragic accident' flies in the face of the facts and is blatantly and disgracefully at odds with the truth. 'It is nothing short of dishonest, deceitful and disingenuous and we demand a retraction.' The families have also called for the release of documents that were sealed at the time of the crash for 100 years, something revealed in a BBC documentary last year. The MoD has said that records held in the National Archives contain personal information and early release of those documents would breach their data protection rights. Mr Stephens said: 'For the Government to believe that data protection laws were designed to protect someone who is living – and who may have made a dreadful decision that night – rather than the truth emerging over 29 service personnel who were killed in an unairworthy aircraft, is a total abomination. 'This decision must be overturned, these files must be seen by a judge, and we will fight this in court if necessary.' Niven Phoenix, a commercial pilot whose father Ian was one of the senior RUC officers killed in the crash, said: 'This was about as far from a tragic accident as you could get. Locking the files away until we are all dead proves there is a cover-up about something. 'The MoD's statement that these files have been sealed to protect third party interests is yet another disingenuous, distasteful and outright dishonest assertion designed to hide the truth using data protection laws which only came into force in the UK long after the crash. 'The Government would prefer for all the children of the Chinook victims to die like their parents rather than provide access, answers and take accountability for past mistakes. This is not the duty of candour promised by Keir Starmer in his election manifesto.' Following the crash, the Chinook's pilots, Flight Lieutenants Richard Cook and Jonathan Tapper, were accused of gross negligence, but this verdict was overturned by the UK Government 17 years later, following a campaign by the families. A subsequent review by Lord Philip set out 'numerous concerns' raised by those who worked on the Chinooks, with the MoD's testing centre at Boscombe Down in Wiltshire declaring the Chinook Mk2 helicopters 'unairworthy' prior to the crash.

MoD ‘dishonest' to call 1994 Chinook crash an accident, say families
MoD ‘dishonest' to call 1994 Chinook crash an accident, say families

Leader Live

time24 minutes ago

  • Leader Live

MoD ‘dishonest' to call 1994 Chinook crash an accident, say families

RAF Chinook ZD576 was carrying 25 British intelligence personnel from RAF Aldergrove in Northern Ireland to a conference at Fort George near Inverness when it crashed in foggy weather on June 2 1994 on the Mull of Kintyre, Scotland. All 25 passengers – made up of personnel from MI5, the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the British Army – were killed, along with the helicopter's four crew members. The families of those who died said earlier this month that they were beginning legal action against the Ministry of Defence (MoD) for not ordering a public inquiry. They want a High Court judge to be able to review information which they say was not included in previous investigations, and which they believe will shed new light on the airworthiness of the helicopter. The families, who have coalesced into the Chinook Justice Campaign, said failing to order a public inquiry is a breach of the UK Government's human rights obligations. An MoD spokesperson said: 'The Mull of Kintyre crash was a tragic accident, and our thoughts and sympathies remain with the families, friends and colleagues of all those who died. 'We have received a pre-action protocol letter from the Chinook Justice Campaign and are considering our response. Therefore, it would be inappropriate to comment further.' Solicitor Mark Stephens, who is representing the families, said: 'The statements issued by the Ministry of Defence in recent days are so blatantly at odds with the facts as we now know them that they have caused immense upset to the families and cast a further cruel and disgraceful shadow on this ongoing travesty of justice. 'We know that the RAF helicopter carrying the 29 service personnel who were killed, serving their country, had been grounded because of fatal flaws in the software on board. 'For the MoD to claim that this was a 'tragic accident' flies in the face of the facts and is blatantly and disgracefully at odds with the truth. 'It is nothing short of dishonest, deceitful and disingenuous and we demand a retraction.' The families have also called for the release of documents that were sealed at the time of the crash for 100 years, something revealed in a BBC documentary last year. The MoD has said that records held in the National Archives contain personal information and early release of those documents would breach their data protection rights. Mr Stephens said: 'For the Government to believe that data protection laws were designed to protect someone who is living – and who may have made a dreadful decision that night – rather than the truth emerging over 29 service personnel who were killed in an unairworthy aircraft, is a total abomination. 'This decision must be overturned, these files must be seen by a judge, and we will fight this in court if necessary.' Niven Phoenix, a commercial pilot whose father Ian was one of the senior RUC officers killed in the crash, said: 'This was about as far from a tragic accident as you could get. Locking the files away until we are all dead proves there is a cover-up about something. 'The MoD's statement that these files have been sealed to protect third party interests is yet another disingenuous, distasteful and outright dishonest assertion designed to hide the truth using data protection laws which only came into force in the UK long after the crash. 'The Government would prefer for all the children of the Chinook victims to die like their parents rather than provide access, answers and take accountability for past mistakes. This is not the duty of candour promised by Keir Starmer in his election manifesto.' Following the crash, the Chinook's pilots, Flight Lieutenants Richard Cook and Jonathan Tapper, were accused of gross negligence, but this verdict was overturned by the UK Government 17 years later, following a campaign by the families. A subsequent review by Lord Philip set out 'numerous concerns' raised by those who worked on the Chinooks, with the MoD's testing centre at Boscombe Down in Wiltshire declaring the Chinook Mk2 helicopters 'unairworthy' prior to the crash.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store