Oct 25, 2017
Car manufacturer Vauxhall announced last week that it will be cutting 400 jobs at Ellesmere Port in Cheshire. Falling car sales figures are to blame. At the same time, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) has announced that investment in the UK car industry is on track to halve this year. Is this the future of the post-Brexit car industry?
Cutting jobs
Vauxhall is part of the PSA Group, which also makes Peugeot and Citroen vehicles. It has cited the ‘challenging European market condition’ as the reason for the 400 job cuts at Ellesmere Port.
According to PSA, the costs at the Ellesmere Port plant were higher than other ‘benchmark plants’ within the company. Thus Ellesmere Port was first in line when it came to cutting costs in the wake of Vauxhall’s falling sales figures. Vauxhall currently employs some 1,800 people at the plant as part of a total UK workforce of 4,500 people, including the factory in Luton where it makes its vans.
PSA Group became the second largest car manufacturer (after Volkswagen) in August when it bought both Vauxhall and Opel from US car giant General Motors. At the time, Prime Minister Theresa May sought assurances from chief executive Carlos Tavares that there would be no job losses. However, it seems that the situation has changed.
Vauxhall has denied that the move is connected with the current Brexit process, insisting it is about maintaining competitiveness within an industry facing a great deal of change. While SUV sales have grown across Europe, the number of five door estates and saloon vehicles sold has fallen. These are the models manufactured at Ellesmere Port.
The Brexit factor
While Vauxhall may not overtly be blaming Brexit, one cannot help but assume that it is a factor in the recent job loss announcements. According to the SMMT, the UK motor industry enjoyed £1.66 billion of investment last year. So far this year, it has received just £647 million. As such, the overall investment figure for the year looks set to crash by as much as half.
In the case of Vauxhall, PSA Group has said that it is not in “a position to consider future investments.” Part of the reason is that it does not have “enough visibility on the future trading relationship with the EU.” So while Vauxhall may deny that the job cuts relate to Brexit, its new owner is citing that as a direct cause of reduced investment commitments.
The plummeting pound
PSA went on to say that the Ellesmere Port plant currently makes around 140,000 Vauxhall Astras per year. A new model is planned for the early 2020s and its aim is to make the plant more productive in preparation for that model.
However, Professor David Bailey from Aston Business School said that the changing emphasis on SUV models was only a part of the problem. He believes the depreciation of sterling since the Brexit vote is causing big issues for many companies – as are the stalled and somewhat farcical Brexit negotiations.
According to the professor, PSA acquired some 33,500 staff across Germany, Hungary, Poland, Austria, Spain and Italy as part of the recent deal. Cutting costs will be one way of making the company profitable. With the decline in sterling, it seems that the UK arm of the business is the one to suffer first.
Brexit Chaos
The sterling issue, the concerns about future trade deals and the myriad other issues surrounding Brexit have clearly played some part in PSA’s decision. They highlight the negative impact that the apparent chaos of the negotiations is already having.
In fact, the negotiations are so bad that EU diplomats are convincing themselves that it is really some cunning plan to make things appear chaotic, while underneath they are calm and organised. However, closer to home there is no such conviction.
Politicians fighting, a complete inability to agree on anything and the looming threat of ‘no deal’ – there’s little surprise among business experts that companies with a European presence are already looking at their options. Even the President of the EU Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, has said that he thinks the process will take longer than anyone thought – five rounds in and nothing at all seems to have been agreed (apart from the fact that everyone needs to agree). In the meantime, UK businesses and jobs could start to see the negative effects snowball, with the car industry leading the way.
Are the Vauxhall job cuts a sign of what’s to come for the UK car industry? Will the halving of investment in the industry mean more job losses before the end of the year? Leave a comment to let us know your views.
Oct 25, 2017
Despite originally planning for a 3 pence per litre increase in fuel prices to come into effect from April 2018, it seems that Chancellor Philip Hammond is now hinting that fuel duty will be frozen in the next Budget.
However, planned cuts to oil production by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) could mean that drivers will face higher costs at the pumps, regardless of the hoped-for freeze.
Fuel duty freeze?
The Chancellor has come under intense pressure from senior members of his party over the matter. They believe that a rise in fuel prices would be unfair on motorists who are already struggling due to a significant rise in inflation and spiralling living costs.
There has been no official comment about the rise (or freeze) from the Treasury. If a fuel duty increase was to take place, it would be the first to occur in seven years. Not only would such a rise affect drivers at the pumps, it would also potentially increase inflation even further. This could risk jobs and slow fiscal growth.
It has been calculated that it would cost motorists and freight companies more than £6 billion extra per year in tax if the suggested fuel duty rise was to go ahead. £3.7 billion of this would come from private households, with the rest coming from the haulage industry.
If the Chancellor was to continue increasing fuel duty on an annual basis, as used to be the case, it would end up costing motorists a massive £23 billion between now and the next election (due in 2022).
Economic arguments
The Conservatives’ DUP allies have spoken out to say that they want to see fuel duty cut. They argue that this would support motorists and be far better for the economy, with people able to afford to drive.
Since March 2011, fuel duty has been frozen at 57.95 pence per litre. This has saved motorists around £186 at the pumps per year. In the face of continuously rising living costs, this amount can really help out many families as they work out their finances.
Not only is there an argument against rising fuel duty, discussions are also being held around how all of these motoring taxes are being spent. There are so many motorists on the UK’s roads that congestion and road maintenance are becoming harder to handle. Providing extra funding for local councils could certainly help with this, but where will the cash come from?
Rising fuel costs
Even if the fuel duty freeze does continue (as many hope it will), this doesn’t necessarily mean that the price of fuel won’t go up. This is mostly due to a pledge between OPEC and other producers, which sees them cutting oil output to steady supply and boost prices. That pledge was due to finish in March 2018, but may now be extended to the end of 2018.
With as much as 1.8 million barrels a day being cut to try to stop oversupply, the cost of a barrel of oil has been pushed up to $60. This is being reflected in fuel costs, which makes it more expensive for car owners when they go to fill up their tanks.
As such, if Philip Hammond does decide that raising fuel duty is a good idea, it could be that motorists are hit twice as hard at the pumps. They’ll be paying extra to cover both the tax increase and the heightened cost of a barrel of oil, making a trip to the petrol station a very expensive one indeed.
With so many individuals and businesses relying on their vehicles in order to work, a fuel duty increase could be a very risky move by the government. OPEC is already making it harder for people to use their cars, vans, and lorries. Any further increase in fuel costs could directly impact the economy.
Have you felt the pain of rising fuel costs? Are you already making fewer journeys as a result? Share your experiences by leaving a comment below.
Oct 25, 2017
Smart motorways were originally sold to motorists as a more efficient way to use the roads. Their innovative technology and time saving insights were going to free up traffic flow and reduce air pollution. Apparently.
However, could it be that they are really just another means of raising revenue through driving fines?
The red X
There will soon be a £100 fine for anyone caught driving in a lane marked with a red X. The red X is used predominantly to indicate when the hard shoulder has been closed. Not only will defying the red X now garner drivers a £100 fine, it will also incur penalty points on their licence.
The fine announcement follows Highways England sending out 50,000 warning letters to drivers who had been caught using smart motorways wrongly. A third of those letters related to drivers who had driven in a lane with a red X displayed above it. If all those drivers had received fines, instead of just warning letters, a cool £1.6 million would have been raised. Clearly, someone in charge has been doing some sums.
Safety concerns
The RAC agrees that handing out these fines is the right thing to do. The organisation hopes that the implementation of the fine will deter people from driving in closed lanes, which is often dangerous due to a hazard.
Seeing motorists using these closed lanes also makes other drivers frustrated, which can be dangerous in itself. This is especially true when people are intentionally using the closed lane until the last minute so that they can then cut in and get ahead of other road users.
(Credit – Bill Boaden)
Education needed
The red X that indicates the closed lane is very clear. However, in the cases of other transgressions, it may be lack of education about smart motorways that is causing motorists to make errors. Many don’t realise they are doing anything wrong.
The Department for Transport is expected to release plans for the new smart motorway fees shortly. In the meantime, it has been suggested that drivers be given more information about how to use smart motorways in the correct way. This would mean fewer drivers ending up with unexpected fines.
Not only would this help people to avoid fines, but it would also make smart motorways safer to use. At present it seems that many drivers are unaware of the risks involved with not using them properly.
For example, many people are unsure of what they would do if their car was to break down at a point when there is no hard shoulder to pull onto. Without this knowledge, there’s much greater scope for a breakdown to result in a nasty accident.
(In case you were wondering, there are emergency bays spaced along smart motorways at regular intervals. These can be used in the event of a problem. Meanwhile, you are advised to always check your tyres, oil, fuel and water before making a journey, to reduce the risk of a breakdown.)
Unfair fines?
With so many drivers being unaware of exactly how they should be using a smart motorway, it could be said that it really isn’t fair to impose fines on people until they have been given far more education about the new way of using these particular roads.
The lack of effort in terms of educating drivers certainly points to an intention to use smart motorways for revenue generation. The move will add to the pressure on drivers already struggling with rising motoring costs. Clearly, using smart motorways incorrectly can result in dangerous situations. However, does that make it right to prioritise fining transgressors before sufficiently educating them?
A cynic might presume that information is being withheld in order to catch people out when they are unsure of how to drive on these new roads. Perhaps our smart motorways are simply offering a smart new way to make more money from the UK’s beleaguered car owners.
With this in mind, Highways England has been asked to provide motorists with a better education about smart motorways. Drivers need to know what they do, how they should be used, and what the different signs mean. They also need to know what not to do, so that they can avoid being fined!
Are you confident that you understand all the rules and regulations relating to smart motorways or will you be one of those who could be in line for a fine due to lack of knowledge? Let us know your views by leaving a comment.
Oct 18, 2017
With the government’s new aim to stop the sale of petrol and diesel cars by 2040, towns and cities around the country are looking at ways to reduce traffic and pollution. Oxford claims to be leading the way with its aim of being the world’s first zero-emissions zone. However, is the promise really all it seems?
(Credit – Lewis Clarke)
The scheme
Oxford’s proposal aims to slash air pollution, which has risen to above legal limits in some areas due to the amount of harmful nitrogen dioxide in the air. The plans are currently undergoing consultation. They involve prohibiting any non-zero emission taxis from the centre of the city, followed by light commercial vehicles and then buses by 2020.
Critics of Oxford’s rather grandiose plan to host the world’s first zero emissions zone might well latch onto the fact that banning traffic from a city centre is not really a viable way to reduce emissions – not unless our cities are prepared to roll out fleets of electric taxis, buses and delivery lorries in the very near future. Additionally, the map of the proposed scheme’s boundaries (PDF) demonstrates the rather small scale of the initial zero emissions zone, which covers just a handful of streets.
Nevertheless, Oxford is going ahead with the consultation for its ‘world first’ plan. The city aims to have a zero-emissions zone that will cover all non-electric vehicles, including HGVs. This zone would expand to cover the whole of the city centre by 2035, according to plans created jointly by the city and county councils. This would result in a 75% reduction in the levels of nitrogen dioxide by the time the scheme completes in 2035, as most of these pollutants come from vehicle exhausts.
Changing position
The plan comes after Oxford was one of 11 cities to breach the safe limit for toxic particles known as PM10s in a study by the World Health Organization last year. It also breached the limits for PM2.5 particles.
The city council has secured some £500,000 worth of government funding in order to install electric charging points for new taxis, along with a further £800,000 to create 100 electric vehicle charging points for residents. However, officials admit more will be needed to deliver the planned zero-emissions zone.
Problems around the country
Many towns and cities around the UK are facing a similar problem, but the Oxford model doesn’t work for everyone. Part of the reason for this is that the university city already has a high percentage of pedestrianised areas where no vehicles travel. This means there is less traffic in the centre of Oxford than in many other cities of a similar size.
Other cities have already tried. London operated a scheme until 2015 that aimed to create a low emissions zone. Founded in 2008, the scheme saw vehicles that failed to meet a low-emissions standard having to pay to enter the city. The aim was to dramatically reduce the polluting gases and particles that Londoners were being exposed to daily.
Unfortunately, the scheme had little impact. The predicted 10% drop in oxides that was expected by 2012 didn’t happen and, three years later, the air quality had not improved at all.
Understanding the problems
According to experts, one of the problems was that the scheme came alongside the growing realisation that diesel vehicles were much more polluting than everyone thought. The scheme has now been replaced with the Ultra Low Emission Zone, along with a plan to convert all double-decker buses in central London to hybrids and all single decker buses to zero emissions by 2020.
Yet this doesn’t deal with the problem of taxis, delivery vehicles and HGVs, which are still polluting the air space. The Oxford model of simply banning these vehicles certainly wouldn’t be feasible in London. It seems that further work is needed before we have a model that can work in all of the UK’s cities and help improve the air quality for everyone.
What else can we do to reduce air pollution in our cities? How long will it be before we have a plan in place that’s both realistic and effective? Leave a comment to share your views.
Oct 5, 2017
Car theft has risen by 30% in recent years, with 85,688 cars reported as stolen in 2016. That compares to just 65,783 in 2013. The figures, gathered by the RAC from 40 police forces using a Freedom of Information request, raise questions around the efficacy of modern anti-theft technology. The RAC also found a notable rise in the theft of motorcycles and scooters.
The numbers from Warwickshire were the most shocking. Car thefts there rose by 189% between 2013 and 2016. Hampshire was second, with a 59% rise, followed by West Yorkshire, with an increase of 57%. In fourth place was Norfolk, with a 56% rise in car theft over the period.
Is modern technology failing?
This rise in car theft is surprising, given the amount that car manufacturers have been spending on fitting new cars with what they believe are effective alarms and immobilisers. The reality seems to be that ‘high-tech car thieves’ are able to get around these without too much trouble at all.
Cars that use keyless fobs seem to be the worst hit, according to the RAC’s research. The findings suggest that this particular technology is far from secure. It seems that those who know how can manipulate the devices to facilitate their criminal plans.
Organised gangs are now one of the main issues when it comes to car theft. They steal cars and export them abroad for profit. One gang was even seen stealing a £60,000 BMW X5 by holding a bag up to a house door. The method suggests that they used a device to activate and extend the reach of the keyless fob inside the home.
The police, Home Office, National Crime Agency, National Vehicle Crime Intelligence Service, Europol and car manufacturers are working together to try and crack down on car crime. However, it seems that the anti-theft devices being put in place are just not up to scratch.
Car theft rates had actually been decreasing since 2002. This highlights the fact that it is the latest technology that is making it easier for people to steal vehicles.
(Credit – Turelio CC by 3.0)
How to keep your car safe
In addition to the fear of having their cars broken into, motorists are also seeing this rise in car thefts have an effect on insurance premiums. Combined with a variety of other factors, this is making the cost of driving even more expensive.
One consequence is a rise in the number of people purchasing anti-theft devices like those used back in the 1980s and 1990s. Steering wheel locks and gear stick locks are enjoying something of a resurgence.
There are several steps you can take to help keep your car safe. Firstly, parking it somewhere safe particularly at night. Always remember to lock it, with all windows and the sunroof closed securely. Remember to leave all valuables out of sight as well. You should also ensure that you have any appropriate alarms and immobilisers fitted, which will hopefully deter anyone who is hoping to steal it.
In addition to this, never leave your car running while it is unattended. Also try to avoid leaving your registration document in the vehicle, as this can help thieves to get away with stealing it if they’re stopped by the police.
If you want an obvious deterrent, a steering wheel lock is ideal. This shows people that you’ve taken steps to secure your car, which may make them think that you have other devices in place too (even if you don’t).
By following these tips, you can decrease your chance of being a victim of car theft, even if the numbers continue their steep rise.
Have you noticed your insurance premiums rising in line with the increase in car theft? Have you resorted to purchasing physical security devices to complement technological ones? Leave a comment below to share your experiences.
Oct 5, 2017
There are lots of factors to consider when choosing which car to buy – brand, model, which colour you prefer and which colours are available in the spec you want, to name but a few. However, few people consider the likelihood of being clamped when choosing their vehicle. Now, new data from the DVLA shows which cars are the most likely to be clamped – and silver Porsches seem to be top of some clampers’ hit lists!
Choose your colour carefully
The new figures show that silver cars are more likely to be clamped around the UK than any other colour. According to the DVLA’s report on clamping figures for 2016, some 118,000 vehicles were clamped or impounded during the year due to not having valid tax. Of those, silver vehicles accounted for 30,035 of the total. Next came blue vehicles, at 23,411, followed by black vehicles at 21,270.
At the other end of the scale were gold, beige and yellow vehicles, with the lowest number of incidences of being clamped. However, could this be more to do with the popularity of the colours themselves, rather than the driver’s habit of getting into trouble?
UK drivers are rather a boring lot when it comes to car colour choices. According to the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, the most popular choice of vehicle colour in the UK in 2016 was white, which accounted for 20.51% of newly registered cars. This was followed by black in second place and grey in third.
The top primary colour is blue, which came in at fourth place with 15.38% of new registrations, an increase of 7.2% on the previous year – showing that colour fans are beginning to show their face in the car-buying world. Red came fifth, followed by silver, green and orange. The biggest decrease in popularity is the brown car, which has seen a 40% decrease in the number of requests in the last year.
It is interesting that silver cars are only the sixth most popular choice of colour, yet the most clamped for non-payment of tax. Could it be that those who are inclined to dodge their vehicle tax obligations have a penchant for silver? Or are silver car drivers just more forgetful than most?
Car makes and clamping
While silver may be the sixth most popular colour, and the most likely to be clamped, what about the type of car?
According to the DVLA, the make and models of cars most often clamped largely reflect the most popular makes and models of cars on the road. The Ford Focus and Vauxhall Astra were top of the list in 2016, with more than 5,000 of each being either impounded or clamped.
But it isn’t just everyday vehicles that feature on the list of clamped vehicles. The 2016 figures showed that the most commonly clamped prestige car is the Porsche. 137 Porches were clamped for not having valid tax in 2016 – more than ten times the number of the second most clamped luxury vehicle (the Bentley, just 12 of which were clamped during the year).
There are also some unusual vehicles on the list. In 2016 the UK authorities clamped or impounded 68 London taxis, two Gulf Stream motorhomes, three Reliant Robins and even a tractor.
When can you be clamped?
Clamping has been a controversial subject in recent years. New guidelines have been brought in to reduce the number of ‘dodgy’ clampers out there. In most cases, for example, you can’t be clamped on private land. However, the police can remove a vehicle that is blocking a road, even if it has broken down.
The Vehicle Operator Services Agency (VOSA) can also clamp a vehicle if it is a danger to road users or if there are outstanding fines on the vehicle. And, of course, your vehicle can be clamped if you don’t have road tax on it, so if you’re in any doubt at all, double check now that you’ve paid your tax. Particularly if you drive a silver Porsche.
Why do you think that silver car drivers are clamped so much more often than those of other colours? Is clamping the right way to tackle non-payment of tax? Share your views by leaving a comment.
