Tories urge Sunak to scrap ‘anti-motorist’ net zero vote
By Paul Homewood
More than 40 Conservative MPs and peers have urged Rishi Sunak to drop a vote, due on Monday, to approve “anti-consumer” and “anti-motorist” net zero quotas for the sale of electric cars.
In a letter to the Prime Minister, the parliamentarians, led by Craig Mackinlay, the chairman of the Net Zero Scrutiny Group, Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg and Dame Priti Patel, warn that the Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) mandate is “likely to cause enormous harm” to companies and consumers.
The intervention suggests Mr Sunak faces a potentially significant rebellion if he goes ahead with the vote on Monday – although the measure is likely to be passed with the help of Labour votes even if Tory backbenchers abstain or vote against.
The mandate will require 22 per cent of cars sold by manufacturers to be electric from next year. By 2030, the quota will gradually rise to 80 per cent.
It has been retained as Government policy despite Mr Sunak’s separate decision to delay the planned ban on the sale of petrol cars from 2030 to 2035 as part of a shift to a “pragmatic and proportionate” approach to net zero.
The letter, sent to Mr Sunak on Saturday, reminds the Prime Minister of his insistence, when he softened some net zero targets in September, that it would be wrong to “interfere so much in people’s way of life without a properly informed national debate”.
The MPs and peers, also including Lord Frost, Sir John Redwood and Sir Iain Duncan Smith, continue: “The legislation will enforce an aggressive ramp up of electric vehicle use to 80 per cent of new car sales in 2030 – regardless of what people would prefer or could afford.
“Many in the car industry do not regard this as a realistic aim, but the attempt to get there through legal coercion is likely to cause enormous harm.
“If the cost of buying and running an EV will become cheaper than petrol and diesel cars, mandating them with this law is unnecessary. This law is anti-consumer, anti-choice and anti-motorist, and will only leave the public poorer. Car-ownership could once again be restricted to the privileged few.”
The letter says the Government “should not be in the business of picking winners”, adding: “We urge you to reconsider this statutory instrument and refrain from putting it to a vote in Parliament on Monday.
The Telegraph also have this poll:
Fairly overwhelming!!
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Somebody is very busy today (snowed in perhaps). I am struggling to keep up.
97% of the people that read here are struggling to understand the ‘mad’ rush to adopt EVs. Likely China will benefit, but no one and nothing else — especially “The Climate”™.
Having a properly informed national debate is not on the cultist Net Zero agenda. It’s the last thing they want because it will expose the myth.
” It’s the last thing they want because it will expose the myth. ”
The myth can be undermined at the first stage of a logical debate: Where is the proof that humans are responsible for dangerous climate change?
Which is exactly why they won’t debate, partly because of the small handful of debates that have happened in recent years, the sceptic side clearly won.
Even if all the problems like battery supply, battery capacity, battery range, Cars catching fire and sinking ships, were all solved, there will never be enough electricity for at least fifty years to keep 33 million vehicles charged.
84% vote against electric cars … so what !!
This is woke western democracy, therefore the executive will do what it wants.
When did a vote ever carry any influence ?? (except when it agrees with the executive ).
Brexit. But that was legally binding – eventually.
GB News only got 11% of idiots in their poll. You could argue as for example Lee McMaster and Geoff do that they work for short city and very large town runarounds and in which case the point made by Forbes that they should start from a golf cart and work upwards to produce a low cost car applies. But – and it is a biggie – you will still have an issue with battery life and replacement cost compared to vehicle value. And probably still throw in materials shortages pushing up costs.
IF . . . you can force people to spend £20,000 for a heat pump, £5,000 for insulation, and £75,000 for an EV, you will have gone a long way towards destroying your country’s wealth . . .
and the freedom that is gives individuals.
‘Enormous harm’ is the intent, not an unintended consequence.
All those ‘net-zero’ products made in china
It is possible that the future of Mr Sunak Will, hang on the whether he insists on proceeding with a vote, or whether he listens to the voice of sanity.
I would hope Sunak listens to the voice of sanity but mainly it is outside Parliament bar a few.
Perhaps the poor souls in Cumbria who lost all power yesterday, have a single digit answer to net zero? What price Heat Pumps and EVs when there is NO ELECTRICITY!
Not just Cumbria , here is a list of power cuts across the country .
https://www.ukpowernetworks.co.uk/power-cut/map
And these are happening every day because there is not enough generation capacity for when demand is high .
But the media will not mention this and most people will not notice because they can be spread out to only happen once in a while for most areas .
I’m still trying to get my head around that statement on that young protester’s placard: ‘People not profit’. Does he really believe that ‘people’ would flourish if no-one made a profit? Who taught him that? And does BBC Verify Unit actually verify that what he is saying is true? I’d love to hear their answer.
Thats climate change economics 101