Buyers of new EVs under £37,000 can get discount under UK scheme
The Department for Transport has reintroduced a grant, which had been scrapped in June 2022, to encourage more drivers to switch from petrol and diesel to electric vehicles.
The £650m electric car grant will offer a discount of up to £3,750 for the 'greenest' vehicles based on sustainability criteria, with a second band offering a discount of up to £1,500.
The move may benefit cheaper electric vehicle makers such as BYD, which has overtaken Tesla in sales in the UK. Prices of new cars built by Elon Musk's company start from about £40,000.
John Lewis, the chief executive of the infrastructure company char.gy, said the reintroduction of the grant brings the UK closer to a point where 'driving electric is accessible to everyone, not just the privileged few'.
The DfT said 23 new electric car models are available for less than £30,000. The government has pledged to ban the sale of new fully petrol or diesel cars and vans from 2030. Chinese EV brands have seized a growing slice of the European market, undercutting western marques to achieve more than 10% of European battery EV sales in some months of 2024.
'We are making it easier and cheaper to own an electric car,' said Heidi Alexander, the transport secretary. 'This grant will not only allow people to keep more of their hard-earned money – it'll help our automotive sector seize one of the biggest opportunities in the 21st century.'
The Conservative government under Rishi Sunak brought in the zero-emission vehicle mandate to force carmakers to sell an increasing proportion of electric cars or face steep fines of up to £15,000 for every vehicle above their fossil-fuel quota.
However, in April the business secretary, Jonathan Reynolds, confirmed the Labour government would relax the rules after an intensive lobbying campaign by the UK car industry against the policy. Carmakers argued they were being forced to make unsustainable discounts in order to attract buyers, although environmental campaigners had called for the government to hold firm.
'This new scheme could be just the shot in the arm needed to help more drivers go electric,' said Simon Williams, the head of policy at the RAC motoring organisation. 'Within weeks discounted cars should start appearing at dealerships across the country. And, as the biggest savings will be given to cars with the strongest 'green' manufacturing credentials, drivers will be picking models that are not only better for their wallets but better for the planet too.'
Sign up to Business Today
Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning
after newsletter promotion
However, this month figures showed that carmakers are on track to meet existing UK electric car sales targets despite the successful lobbying push.
Some buyers have been wary of going electric for a number of reasons, with higher upfront vehicle costs a key concern. 'Range anxiety' caused by an inconsistent and sometimes expensive array of public charge points has also been a factor, although it is diminishing because of the rapid pace of public charger installations.
The government said there are now 82,000 public charge points available across the UK.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
How the BBC got into a mess over Gaza
On Monday, the BBC released its long-awaited report into its decision to remove the documentary Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone from its platforms. The report determined that not making viewers aware of the fact that the narrator's father was a member of the Hamas-run government of Gaza constituted a breach of its editorial policies, specifically on accuracy. However, the documentary was not found to have breached guidelines on impartiality. As the Guardian's media editor Michael Savage tells Helen Pidd, the release of this report has come after a particularly intense period for the BBC, in which its handling of the war in Gaza has been heavily criticised. In response to the resignation of Gary Lineker, its coverage of Glastonbury performers, and its decision not to broadcast certain documentaries, the BBC has faced heightened criticism from many sides in the conflict. The pair discuss how the Labour government is approaching the BBC, the shrinking number of licence fee subscribers, and whether this string of controversies will change the way the corporation approaches more sensitive issues. Support the Guardian today:
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Gagging order to cover up Afghan leak must never be used again
The Taliban's takeover of Afghanistan in 2021 resulted in a scramble to flee from Kabul airport WAKIL KOHSAR/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES T hat legal abomination, the superinjunction, is traditionally regarded as the last resort of the desperate celebrity attempting to conceal compromising information. It is a draconian device that not only prohibits the media from reporting a court case — an injunction — but prevents the world from knowing that such an injunction even exists (the 'super' bit). It is intended not so much to stifle legitimate journalistic scrutiny of a court hearing as to smother it. The blanket of secrecy a superinjunction confers means that cases involving serious misconduct by individuals and institutions can go unnoticed by the outside world for months or years, or possibly for ever. Disclosing its very existence can land one in jail. When the party seeking to conceal their actions for this length of time is the government, and when the parties being kept in the dark are the public and parliament, it risks becoming a tool of authoritarianism. Yet that is exactly what has occurred in a case revealed by this newspaper. One in which a military data breach that placed tens of thousands of Afghans in jeopardy, and resulted in a covert rescue and resettlement programme potentially costing £7 billion, being hidden for two years in what the judge finally lifting the order called a vacuum of scrutiny. It is the first time a British government has used a superinjunction in this way and it must be the last. In observing its terms, in place for so much longer than intended, ministers misled parliament, if largely by omission, concealing from relevant committees and the Commons as a whole a scandal that should have resulted in heads rolling down Whitehall. It concerned the unauthorised release in February 2022 of a Ministry of Defence database containing the names of tens of thousands of Afghans at risk of retribution from the restored Taliban regime. The list was transmitted by a soldier at a special forces barracks in London to Afghan contacts in Britain as he attempted to verify applications for sanctuary in Britain. The list subsequently found its way to Afghanistan. • Did the risk ever justify the secrecy in this Kafkaesque calamity? When one of the individuals it was passed to threatened to publish it on Facebook it became a potential death warrant for many of those named, and possibly their relatives. As a result, the then Conservative government decided to relocate thousands of Afghans, adults and children, to Britain in a covert programme that was later endorsed by the current Labour government. Incredibly, the existence of this operation, involving some 23,000 people, was kept secret even from the discreet Commons intelligence and security committee. The superinjunction was granted in September 2023, supposedly as a four-month measure to help cloak a rescue. But it would last for almost two years, the MoD continuing to insist that it was necessary to save lives, though there was a possibility that the database had already fallen into the possession of the Taliban. Whatever the reality of this, the superinjunction continued to act as a shield for official incompetence. Due to the continuing secrecy surrounding this fiasco it is not known who, if anyone, was disciplined for the breach. What is clear is the disquiet of a High Court judge involved in hearings in which The Times and Daily Mail sought to have details of the scandal released. At one point Mr Justice Chamberlain warned that it could be perceived as censorship. Concerns were also raised that the government was using the gagging order to control the narrative surrounding the scandal. Unfortunately, he was overruled by a court of appeal again swayed by MoD warnings of potential disaster. Now, those objections have evaporated, the risks apparently being overstated according to a review. So much for parliamentary and press oversight. In terms of free speech the superinjunction is a weapon of mass destruction. No government should be allowed to employ one again.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Bank of England's Bailey backs IMF to help fix problems in global economy
LONDON, July 15 (Reuters) - Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey said on Tuesday the International Monetary Fund had a key role to play in tackling the buildup of risky imbalances in the world economy, many of them coming from the United States and China. In a speech he was due to give to Britain's finance elite, Bailey acknowledged the concerns of U.S. President Donald Trump's administration about the danger of IMF overreach. But the BoE boss said attempts to fix the problems in the world economy - chief among them the big U.S. trade and current account deficits alongside China's big surpluses and its weak domestic demand - had to be resolved at the multilateral level. "If it is only done at the national level, we will get less good policymaking," he was due to tell the annual Mansion House dinner. Bailey has previously stressed the importance of the IMF and other multilateral bodies at a time of heightened trade tensions following Trump's imposition of high import tariffs and his threats to go further. The IMF recently criticised another part of Trump's economic programme - its plans for massive tax cuts. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has accused the Fund of straying too far from its core economic stability and surveillance missions. Bailey said countries running big deficits were typically the ones that come under the most pressure in financial markets. "We have seen market disturbance this year. We have to be highly alert to financial stability risks – something that I can assure you we are following closely," he said. Bailey also said China should free up its domestic demand as part of a global plan to tackle "excess imbalances before dangerous levels of trade restrictions come into play, and before we face the prospect of difficult adjustment with macroeconomic volatility and financial instability." Bailey said the IMF should consider using its powers to convene talks with member countries - chief among them the U.S. - as well as working with the World Trade Organisation to produce a nuanced assessment of the global trading system. "I think it helps to remember that the key challenge we all face is to increase growth in the world economy: to grow the pie to support living standards for the people we serve, all of the time," Bailey said. "It is as simple as that." He said he would use his new role as head of the Financial Stability Board - grouping global financial regulators - to develop with the IMF resilience tests for the global financial system, including firms such as hedge funds and banks. Bailey also said in his speech that he favoured using digital payment technology for retail payments and bank accounts as a next step for the industry. He said he was unconvinced about the need for a retail central bank digital currency, and that stablecoins were not a substitute for commercial bank money.
