(Glasgow Central) (SNP):
There is indeed not terribly much to oppose here, but this is about
the ambition of the Government to make a change, to make something
different out of this Bill and to do something different. I draw
the attention of Government Members to what Norway has done to
increase the use of electric vehicles so that 42%
of its cars are now electric vehicles. The
Norwegians did that with incentives such as no annual road tax for
electric vehicles company car tax reduction to 40%
on electric vehicles changes to purchase and
import taxes, and an exemption from 25% VAT on purchase. They had
an ambitious programme, and they needed the infrastructure, but
they took those actions and they saw a dramatic change in the
number of electric vehiclesas a result.
I encourage the Government to look at what can be done. If cars
are to be around for some time to come, how can we make them
better? In many parts of Scotland, for example, people need a car
to get around In large parts of rural Scotland it would be
impossible to do anything other than have a car, but if we can
make those cars electric vehicles providing the
plug-in infrastructure for them and the tax incentives to reduce
their cost, we could make that change achievable. I ask the
Government to be more ambitious...
The Exchequer Secretary to the Treasury ():..I thank both hon. Members
for the points that they have made and the good questions they
asked. I reiterate that tackling climate change and improving the
environment are top priorities of the Government. The UK is a
world leader on climate change. The reason why we are doing this
is to address several things at once.
Let us remind ourselves what the WLTP is. It is designed to
ensure that we are reflecting real world driving conditions more
accurately by including a longer test time. The aim is to reduce
the 40% gap between lab tests and real world driving. We have put
many other levers in place to address the broader issue of
climate change.
I accept the point about complexity—I recognise the need to
ensure that this does not have an overall impact on the consumer.
One of the reasons why we are phasing it in this way is to better
protect the automotive sector. I thank both Members for the
points they made.
To read the whole debate, CLICK
HERE
