Budget: EV 3p per mile confirmed
This will kill EV adoption, just to put it into perspective this is the equivalent of an average ICE car (38.6MPG) having 25.5p added per litre of fuel, in a single budget.
The even more ridiculous thing is plug in hybrids are 1.5p per mile, so people with 80+ miles of range in their Golfs etc. will pay half price, even though they are needlessly dragging around an internal combustion engine for 99% of their journeys.
You're viewing part of a thread.
@TIN I'm based in the UK. I agree that parts of this could have been thought through better but I don't think publicly subsidised parking outside homes that were built within walking distance of towns & stations, because that was how you reached towns before cars existed, is neutral or a net good. Those houses become overvalued because people price in cheap parking, meaning people who can't/can't afford to drive are priced out of homes that would suit their lifestyles.
@TIN meanwhile buses are held up in traffic by drivers living in or near urban centres, and those car owners drive door to door rather than using public transport, reducing the profitability of the public transport and leaving fewer transport options for non-drivers. Meanwhile pedestrians are left with no or narrow pavements because an entire lane of the carriageway, maybe two, is given over to stationary vehicles.
@TIN and high streets suffer because walkable town centres suddenly become a less tempting option for the people who could spend ten minutes walking in, or ten minutes driving out to a supermarket they can park at (where again, their parking is "free", ie it is subsidised by shoppers paying more, and not all of those shoppers are drivers)
@TIN and, lastly, if all your roads have cars parked along them then there is no room for safe cycle lanes, which again challenges any efforts towards net zero. Not least for children and teens, as suddenly all their parents have to chauffeur them in cars for every middle-distance urban journey for their entire childhood and adolescence to get them safely to their destinations, rather than letting them get there alone or cycling alongside them in a segregated lane.
@TIN none of this is to say that nobody should be allowed to park near their house; but in general it would do us all good to recognise that parking is never free, even if we're not personally paying an upfront fee.
It's a really interesting point and I hadn't thought about street parking as an uncosted benefit before. I suppose the suburban semi with a drive also has street parking, which means that they get the benefit too, it's a public good, but they're only using it for visitors or n+1 cars. No easy solution for that.
The key point I was making though, before we get too distracted by the parking argument, is that for those of us driving electric without home charging it's already very expensive and it would be nice to rebalance that if we're going to move to per mile road pricing.
It is also strange to move just one vehicle fuel type to per mile taxation, rather than all of them.
@TIN I agree with your last point: the per-mile setup should apply to all vehicles according to size and weight if it is truly for road wear. Pollution can then be captured separately according to fuel source. Unfortunately the government has been too toothless to increase fuel duty for years.
Regarding your other point: yes! I think councils should run permit charging like resident parking: if you have a resident permit you can charge in council car parks for £x.
the per-mile setup should apply to all vehicles according to size and weight if it is truly for road wear.
Why would it be for road wear specifically? That's not the current situation (as indicated by the fact that vehicles with lower emissions pay less), and none of it is hypothecated for road-specific funding anyway.
@HermitBee because that's why Reeves said electric vehicles should pay per mile. She announced it by saying "Because all cars contribute to the wear and tear on our roads, I will ensure that drivers are taxed according to how much they drive, not just by the type of car they use.”
I'm not saying this particularly carries through to how roads are funded; I'm saying if this claim is the reason to tax EVs then the tax should be structured differently.
Ah fair. I didn't listen to the words that went with the policy, because they are usually in direct opposition to it. Like how she didn't just raise income tax.