Campaigners Criticize Proposed Ban on Petrol Cars as Attack on Personal Freedom
As the possibility of a complete ban on new petrol cars within six years becomes more likely, campaigners are expressing their concerns about what they see as an attack on personal freedom. All election manifestos have now been released, and if the next government follows through on its electoral promises, a ban on new petrol and diesel cars by 2030 will almost certainly be on the legislative agenda.
The Conservative government had previously stated that decarbonizing cars and vans is crucial for achieving net zero emissions and had pushed back the deadline for the last sale of internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles to 2035. This commitment is still included in their manifesto. However, opposition parties (with the exception of Reform) are pledging to bring forward the ban.
The regulation introduced by the Tories requires that 22 percent of each manufacturer’s new vehicle registrations must be zero-emission. Manufacturers that fail to meet this target will face fines of £15,000 per ICE car sold beyond the limits.
Labour, the frontrunner in the election, states in its manifesto that it will support the transition to electric vehicles by speeding up the rollout of charging points, restoring the phase-out date for new cars with internal combustion engines to 2030, and standardizing information about battery conditions for buyers of second-hand electric cars. The Liberal Democrats also promise to restore the requirement that all new cars and small vans sold from 2030 are zero-emission vehicles.
The Green Party takes it a step further and aims to end the sales of new petrol and diesel-fueled vehicles by 2027 and eliminate the use of all petrol and diesel vehicles on the road by 2035 if elected.
However, Reform, in its manifesto “contract,” opposes the bans altogether, arguing for the scrapping of net-zero targets and any legal requirements for manufacturers to sell electric cars. The Social Democratic Party (SDP) acknowledges the scientific consensus on fossil fuels contributing to climate change but does not support the idea of achieving net zero emissions.
The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), which represents the interests of the UK automotive industry, emphasizes the need for incentives rather than penalties. SMMT CEO Mike Hawes states that manufacturers are committed to a zero-carbon new vehicle market and are investing billions in developing electric vehicles. He acknowledges that while the EV market has grown rapidly, concerns about affordability and charging accessibility remain significant barriers. Hawes argues that a fair and fast transition depends on providing compelling incentives for all drivers and operators, as well as mandating targets for a nationwide charging infrastructure.
Campaigners, however, view the push to ban ICE vehicles as an “obsession.” Alan Miller, co-founder of the Together Declaration, calls it an attack on freedoms. He criticizes the approach of imposing new laws and rules instead of promoting innovation in transportation. Miller argues that such measures limit citizens’ ability to move freely and negatively impact businesses and families, especially those who rely on cars for mobility.
The Green Party co-leader, Adrian Ramsay, acknowledges that while electric cars are increasingly popular among those who can afford them, they are not accessible to everyone. The Green Party aims for a transition to EVs and the development of a charging infrastructure that is affordable and available at scale. Ramsay believes this transition should happen sooner to reduce emissions and combat urban air pollution.
In conclusion, the ban on petrol cars is a contentious issue in the upcoming election. While some parties support an accelerated transition to electric vehicles, others argue for a more cautious approach, taking into consideration affordability and accessibility. The debate centers around finding the right balance between environmental goals and personal freedom.