Skip to content

Climate change: Set target to cut car use, minister told

June 24, 2021
tags:

By Paul Homewood

 

  Now they’re after your car!

 

 

 

 image

Shifting to electric vehicles will still leave the UK with serious transport problems, a report has said.

The IPPR think tank said emissions will fall, but the number of cars on the road will continue to grow.

It foresaw a 28% increase in car ownership by 2050, leading to more jams and harm to the economy.

But the government said it had plans to make transport greener and it was committed to offering people a range of travel options.

Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said in March that car use must shrink.

The IPPR said Mr Shapps’ long-awaited Transport Decarbonisation Strategy should harmonise with this by committing to peak car ownership by 2030.

Unless there is a change in policy, car ownership is expected to be driven up by a growing economy and increasing population.

The IPPR said failure to tackle this will have negative effects on:

  • Health: Walking and cycling (when practical) are healthier than sitting in a car.
  • Resources: An ever-expanding car fleet drains raw materials and energy.
  • Urban space: Fewer cars would mean more trees, play space, and room for walkers and cyclists.
  • Congestion: Traffic jams damage the economy and lead to demand for more and bigger roads.
  • Inequality: Allowing current trends to continue will widen the social divide between those who own cars and those who don’t.

But the IPPR said that a £27bn roads programme benefits drivers and that its citizens’ juries on environmental issues show the public are more radical than ministers.

Its South Wales Valleys citizens’ jury said: “Electric cars are only part of the answer; we also need fewer car trips overall, so a move to electric vehicles must only happen in combination with public transport improvements and a reduction in journeys.”

The IPPR’s proposals to achieve the UK’s low-carbon transition fairly include a national guarantee to make it possible to live a good life without needing to own a car.

It says this should include seven-day public transport for all areas, and the principle that everyday needs should be accessible within a 20-minute walk, cycle or public transport trip.

The report says ministers should introduce a "help-to-move scheme" with grants and loans to help people buy cycles, electric scooters, e-bikes or electric vehicles where they need them.

Luke Murphy, head of the IPPR Environmental Justice Commission, said:

“The imperative for urgent action [in cutting CO2] creates a once-in-a-generation opportunity to put in place a new approach to how we all travel.

“The government’s current preferred strategy places an overwhelming focus on the shift to electric vehicles. Such an approach will not deliver for people or planet.”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57570010

 

This shows that the climate agenda has never been about the climate, but has been aimed at controlling our lives. The ability of ordinary people to go where they like, do what they like, when they like is anathema to these people. How dare Joe Public go on holiday in his car or have a day out in the countryside.

You will note the reference to “citizens’ juries”, but since when were a group of people handpicked by the left wing IPPR a substitute for democracy? If the public want a £27bn roads programme, they have the chance to vote for it at the polls.

 

And how will all of this be enforced?

There are the usual demands for a mass expansion of public transport. But apart from being unaffordable, it would have little effect, as people don’t want to give up the convenience and freedom, which their cars provide.

As I have surmised before, we will end up being priced off the roads, particularly with road charging heading our way.

They let the cat out of the bag with this statement:

The IPPR’s proposals to achieve the UK’s low-carbon transition fairly include a national guarantee to make it possible to live a good life without needing to own a car.

It says this should include seven-day public transport for all areas, and the principle that everyday needs should be accessible within a 20-minute walk, cycle or public transport trip.

In other words, they want to turn COVID lockdowns into climate ones, by keeping us trapped in our own local area.

Steve Gooding from the RAC Foundation sums it up when he says: “The challenge for government is that we’re not just going to have to think about how we travel, but when, where and even whether we continue to travel in the ways that had become the norm pre-Covid.

“That means changing our lifestyles, which could be better for us all in the round, but might not seem immediately attractive.”

Changing our lifestyles, whether we like it or not.

38 Comments
  1. mjr permalink
    June 24, 2021 1:38 pm

    it shows that covid regulations and lockdonw have never been about an illness not that different for most people to annual flue. It has always been about control and removal of freedoms. And so now as the covid calamity cannot be dragged on any more and is running out of steam, they move on to climate change.

  2. Jack Broughton permalink
    June 24, 2021 1:48 pm

    The Government and the evil CCC are getting away with murder in the UK because the opposition to their evil schemes is throttled. The recent Swiss referendum against paying more for energy to support climate change and the pre-covid “gillet–jeune” marches in France show what people really think of the drivel that is being force-fed to them, when given the chance to protest. Apparently less and less people trust the meja – what a surprise!

  3. June 24, 2021 1:48 pm

    Really great posts one after another. Much appreciated.

    Btw I am a regular reader though not a regular commenter.

  4. PaulM permalink
    June 24, 2021 1:48 pm

    If it isn’t an agenda it is certainly a narrative. Unless we start to kick back it will simply increase and accelerate. Problem is I’m not sure what it is we should be doing. In my small way I do push back at the eco-alarmists who write drivel in the local paper. Any suggestions?

  5. mjr permalink
    June 24, 2021 1:52 pm

    BBC at it again today .. McGrath and Harrabin both with articles, one promoting a CO2 capture scheme, the other about cutting out meat.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57580254
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-57588248

    Under the heading of News. News?? really? PR for the CCC

  6. mjr permalink
    June 24, 2021 1:57 pm

    Also did anyone pick up on the news from earlier in the week about teachers wanting to teach junior school children to protest against climate change
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9714945/Primary-school-children-taught-stage-climate-change-protests-teachers-say.html
    thank God my kids are grown up and not subject to brainwashing from the education blob

  7. Harry Passfield permalink
    June 24, 2021 2:29 pm

    There really is a law of unintended consequences: I get a feeling of ‘Trabants all round’. I’m only surprised they (CCC)(Surely, they’re missing a P there) haven’t argued for building a wall to hold CO2 – sorry, Carbon – back.
    Deben et al only want to line their pockets and those of their families.

  8. Douglas Dragonfly permalink
    June 24, 2021 2:45 pm

    Here we get a glimpse of government thinking.
    Gave me a huge smile.
    They just want wealth and power and will do and say ANYTHING.
    https://www.thenationalnews.com/world/europe/north-sea-oilfield-project-set-for-approval-despite-uk-s-green-ambitions-1.1247366

  9. David V permalink
    June 24, 2021 2:50 pm

    These people don’t live in the real world. I live in rural Suffolk – hardly the most isolated part of the country. It is 6 or 7 miles to the nearest station, school, shops or doctor. There is no public transport. It’s at least an hours drive to the nearest hospital. There are more than 400 people in my village. I cannot understand how anyone imagines it would be possible economically to provide “seven-day public transport” or “everyday needs … within a 20-minute walk, cycle ride or public transport trip” for every rural village. Presumably they expect all rural villages to be abandoned and the population rehoused in the cities.

    • June 24, 2021 3:03 pm

      It’s the same for me in Devon. The only public transport is a minibus which collects kids and takes them to and from school. 10 miles to the supermarket, proper market, butchers, bakers, doctors, dentists etc – 15 miles to the station. No way can any needs be met by walking or cycling and good luck laying on public transport.

      • June 24, 2021 5:28 pm

        Cycling? In Devon? We have some very big hills here and during the summer huge numbers of tourists clogging up the roads.

        In the winter we have the Devon monsoons and dark nights so quite when we would cycle and to where, I don’t know.

    • dennisambler permalink
      June 24, 2021 3:56 pm

      That is what they want, smart cities with access to the countryside permitted and escorted by “rangers” etc. They are saving the planet…for themselves.

  10. CheshireRed permalink
    June 24, 2021 2:57 pm

    The entire Net Zero racket is the biggest example yet of government pushing big shiny expensive policies while NOT getting the smaller issues boxed off.
    There’s dozens of policies that need refining or fixing, but nope, instead off they go on another ego/driven wild goose chase. Absolutely crackers.

  11. dennisambler permalink
    June 24, 2021 4:13 pm

    IPPR is a long time Labour think tank, although they claim to be independent. “IPPR is a registered charity and the UK’s pre-eminent progressive think tank.”

    David Miliband started his career with IPPR:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Miliband

    From 1989 to 1994, he worked as a Research Fellow and policy analyst at the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR). He was appointed Secretary of the IPPR’s Commission on Social Justice upon its foundation in 1992 by the then leader of the Labour Party, John Smith.

    Having given us the Climate Change Act, Ed Miliband is involved with IPPR, as Co-chair, with Caroline Lucas of the Green Party.

    IPPR Environmental Justice Commission
    https://www.ippr.org/environment-and-justice/commissioners/

    One of their “commissioners” is Farhana Yamin, “Associate Fellow at Chatham House, founder Track 0 and Extinction Rebellion activist. An internationally recognised environmental lawyer, climate change and development policy expert, Farhana has advised leaders and countries for 20 years. She is an associate fellow at Chatham House, a visiting professor at University College London and a member of the Global Agenda Council on Climate Change at the World Economic Forum.

    She is lead author for three assessment reports for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on adaptation and mitigation issues. [She is not a scientist but contributes to reports that are described as by “the world’s top scientists”]

    She continues to provide legal, strategy and policy advice to NGOs, foundations and developing nations on international climate change negotiations under the UNFCCC.”

    In 2006 IPPR had the following advice for public agencies interfacing with the public:
    https://www.ippr.org/publications/warm-wordshow-are-we-telling-the-climate-story-and-can-we-tell-it-better

    “…it is our recommendation that, at least for popular communications, interested agencies now need to treat the argument as having been won.”

    “This means simply behaving as if man-made climate change is real, and that individual actions to prevent further change will be effective. The UK Government’s new climate-change slogan – ‘Together this generation will tackle climate change’ (Defra 2006) – is but an example of this approach. It constructs…its own factuality.”

    Seems to have worked….

  12. John H permalink
    June 24, 2021 4:15 pm

    They’ll wean us off our IC engines by hiking road tax each year. The only way to manage for people with no affordable car and no public transport to places outside walking or cycling distance is by horse back, then I predict a hay tax because horse fart greenhouse gases.
    Seriously though, we do have to unite with Lord Lawson’s outfit, otherwise the country will come to a grinding halt.

    • dennisambler permalink
      June 24, 2021 4:24 pm

      France is banning internal short distance flights where a train service is available. In Wales Drakeford is freezing any spending on new roads. As congestion increases he will then impose limits on car use in his Socialist Utopia. He is soon to start a pilot project on “Universal Basic Income”, paying people not to work, they have been so used to it under furlough.

      • Phoenix44 permalink
        June 25, 2021 9:03 am

        Macron is playing with fire in France. He keeps pandering to his small group of urban elites whilst inflaming the countryside. If Le Pen wins next year France will be really shaken up.

      • Chaswarnertoo permalink
        June 26, 2021 9:36 am

        Drakefart is not popular in rural Wayells. Only the Liebore pobol y cwm keep him in power.

  13. Ken Pollock permalink
    June 24, 2021 4:27 pm

    I agree with all the above and would add two things. Firstly, the BBC employs four environment reporters, Justin Rowlatt, David Shukman, Roger Harrabin and Matt McGrath. They do not have a single science degree among them. They are barely numerate. Harrabin wrote to me to say that pH was too difficult a concept for listeners to understand.
    Secondly, I was a county councillor in Worcestershire for 12 years with 18 rural parishes. The idea that those rural people could be adequately served by public transport is absurd, as I pointed out to Greens and the like on several occasions. So the recipe is to denude the countryside, and we all live in towns. No thank you…

  14. Mad Mike permalink
    June 24, 2021 5:35 pm

    “That means changing our lifestyles, which could be better for us all in the round, but might not seem immediately attractive.”

    Did this guy write the scripts for Yes Minister? Translation; “This means we will tell how to live and you won’t like it but you better get used to it.”

    • Phoenix44 permalink
      June 25, 2021 8:26 am

      “Better for you” isn’t the same as “what you want”.

      Never going to work. Been tried hundreds of times, always fails. The only questions are how long it takes for the revolution and how bloody it is.

  15. Vernon E permalink
    June 24, 2021 6:56 pm

    Why even challenge. Its UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainabilty and it has the support of the most influential people in the Western wirld. Just suck it up. WE lost.

    • Chaswarnertoo permalink
      June 26, 2021 9:38 am

      They will have to pry my Alfa from my cold, dead hands. And I will take a decent honour guard with me.

  16. Chilli permalink
    June 24, 2021 7:55 pm

    Hang on, so on the one hand government tell us a deadly disease is stalking the land and we must all socially distance from one another and avoid enclosed spaces.

    On the other they tell us we must give up our personal air-conditioned vehicles and stand packed like sardines on a bus or train.

    Can’t see it happening myself.

  17. Jack Broughton permalink
    June 24, 2021 8:45 pm

    The problems of intermittency are still not appreciated by our rulers. California is asking users to minimise usage during the coming hot spell to protect the grid from “Climate Change” …… i.e. lack of power supply really. We will soon have the same problem in winters, will be hard to blame climate change then tho’.

  18. cookers52 permalink
    June 24, 2021 10:06 pm

    This reduction in private car use is getting transferred into planning policy throughout the UK.

    However for my local plan I did point out that every school in the county was totally reliant on the motor car. Every school causes traffic congestion and pollution

  19. subseaeng permalink
    June 24, 2021 10:09 pm

    These t**sers should come and live where we do in a rural location 30 miles from central London and see how they get on with one bus a day to get somewhere with a train station – oh that’s right I need to get a horse. What utter nonsense, I despair!

  20. Gary Kerkin permalink
    June 24, 2021 10:51 pm

    I am more concerned about the ability of Harrabin and the other BBC environment reporters to treat any topic objectively. For example Harrabin cites the IPPR:

    “The IPPR said failure to tackle this will have negative effects on:

    Health: Walking and cycling (when practical) are healthier than sitting in a car.
    Resources: An ever-expanding car fleet drains raw materials and energy.
    Urban space: Fewer cars would mean more trees, play space, and room for walkers and cyclists.
    Congestion: Traffic jams damage the economy and lead to demand for more and bigger roads.
    Inequality: Allowing current trends to continue will widen the social divide between those who own cars and those who don’t.”

    Looking at some of these items:

    Health: because public transport might not be available, adverse weather is likely to have an adverse effects on the health of those who have to walk or cycle implying a cost on the health care system which could be very large. Does Harrabin not consider this important? Or does he choose to ignore it?

    Urban space: No it won’t. People limited by public transport availability and routes will have to live closer to work and facilities and this will place a greater demand for more inner-city housing. Where does Harrabin think this additional demand will be built?

    Congestion: He doesn’t think that congestion will not occur with increased public transportation on the roads?

    Inequality: Will exist whatever the situation but the main reason for its increase under the IPPR rules will be by preventing those less well off from even thinking about owning a vehicle because internal combustion engines will be banned and the cost of electric vehicles will not drop as many proponents would have us believe.

    • Phoenix44 permalink
      June 25, 2021 9:11 am

      The BBC are not remotely objective as they completely refuse to challenge these claims that it’s all “good for us.” It is entirely obvious very few people will choose these things and yet the BBC blithely ignores this and pretends we would choose them if we were “educated” enough. This is just a deliberate refusal to face facts.

  21. June 25, 2021 12:50 am

    So when are all MPs and Lords going to be forced to take public transport then?
    Come on Boris, do it now to save the planet!

  22. John Mosel permalink
    June 25, 2021 1:06 am

    The solution is simple. Ban people who read tabloids from owning a vehicle.

  23. Phoenix44 permalink
    June 25, 2021 8:23 am

    How can having more people owning cars “widen the divide” between people who own cars and those who don’t? If ownership drives inequality then having more ownership must reduce inequality. This is absolute, unmitigated nonsense.

    The rest is just deluded fantasy, attempting to dress up a drastic reduction in our wealth as being good for us.

  24. June 25, 2021 11:28 am

    My 84 yo Mum initiated her alarm pendant last week. I live 140 miles away. Using my car I was with her in 2.5 hrs. Public transport, anyone?

  25. John Smith permalink
    June 25, 2021 4:37 pm

    I like this bit: It says this should include seven-day public transport for all areas, and the principle that everyday needs should be accessible within a 20-minute walk, cycle or public transport trip.

    I live up in The Galloway Hills, half a mile from a proper road. My nearest shop is 12 miles away.

  26. Adam Gallon permalink
    June 25, 2021 4:53 pm

    Fewer cars eh?
    “Inequality: Allowing current trends to continue will widen the social divide between those who own cars and those who don’t.”

  27. Thomas Carr permalink
    June 25, 2021 9:31 pm

    If the prospect of the loss of personal transport — cars in particular — is to be tested at the ballot box the outcome is predictable. Similarly when it becomes apparent that the electric cars parked against the pavement have no means of overnight charging reality will prevail or charging duration will be less than 10 minutes to ‘power -up’ on the forecourts for at least 400 miles

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: