Discussion in 'transport' started by London_Calling, Apr 12, 2009.
Good idea possibly.
It has been done here for a few years to get older, less efficient vehicles off the road. Plus of course it helps stimulate car buying. Here the idea was that you would get the money as a government discount against a new car, rather than a cash in hand payment. You had to take your old car to the dealership who would discount the new car, and then take your old car for scrap.
As a result there are relatively few bangers about. And of course it has meant that the cost of old cars is that of the scrappage payment.
The timing belt on my car just went, so I'm hoping this goes through...
my car is 11 years old so would qualify, I was just thinking of buying another second hand motor eventually, but if there is a reasonably priced new one, and they knock £2000 off, might be tempted by this
What is the cheapest new car out there?
less than two grand - only in india at the mo though
It's a good idea as long as people are absolutely clear what it is for - to support fairly wealthy car manufacturers and foreign government investment - and not for any kind of 'green' reasons.
It's interesting that it doesn't apply to British-made cars only, so in effect people here will be propping up industry in other countries, which is nice.
Won't this roughly cap the second hand market at £2000?
That is one of my concerns, and Dessiato said it has had just that effect in Portugal.
Right now, with a bit of effort you can get a perfectly safe, reliable car for 800-1000 pounds. If such cars are worth 2 grand trade in, are they are gonna instead be sold for say 1600 quid to someone about to buy a new car to trade in- thus pricing low income motorists out of the market?
My other concern is how we pay for this- either more government debt or more fuel duty, and both are too high already....
I await the details , but this could be a 'double whammy' to low income drivers.
If this had the caveat that the 2 grand only goes to low emission/greener cars this could be quite useful...
This is neither more nor less than a subsidy to the car industry - and, as moose points out, not only the industry in this country. I don't agree with it at all.
they had an amusing bit about this on the now show this week it starts about 16 minutes in
the most carbon that a car procedures is during its manufacture. bloody stupid idea. should be working on getting people out of their cars instead.
ah thanks for pointing me to that wondered where those guys were, very funny, and it works outside the uk.
I'm also interested in the environmental side to this because it seems a bit complicated in terms of emissions from 9+ year-old cars, cost of manufacture, recyling, etc, but I haven't seen input from the Greens about this policy yet . . .
Scrapping a perfectly serviceable car and manufacturing a new one is hardly energy-efficient. Meanwhile, the difference in emissions between a new car and one ten years old isn't that great, and cars older than that come off the roads in increasing numbers anyway as rust and mechanical failure take their toll. I don't think this is an environmental measure at all, even if they try and dress it up as one: it's just designed to get people buying more new cars.
IMO sarahluv is right: we should be looking at ways of reducing car use, not tinkering about with incentives to buy more.
Yep. I can't see a time when I'll be able to spend much more than £1000 on a car without using finance to pay it (and stuff that, frankly) so a potential £2000 trade-in on a car I'd have to spend another £8000 to buy is meaningless to me. And I agree about the possibility of people not selling older secondhand cars as 'drivers' anymore, theyll get flogged for the trade-in market instead and I'll be stuffed!
They're not scrapped though, at least not in the sense I understand. EU rules mean X% is recycled.
And I mean the environmental issue is complicated because there are so many considerations, for example an economic depression is great for the environment on face value because of the significant reduction in industry and use of raw materials but people aren't working . . . . so where does the balance lay between creating employment in a depression and the price of a particular economic measure to the environment . . .
I suppose my point is you may take a different view if you have a wife, three kids, a mortgage you can't pay and you've been one of the tens of thousands laid off in the motor industry.
That's true, but it still seems incredibly wasteful to take vehicles off the road that have several years' life left in them and replace them with new ones that take a considerable amount of energy to manufacture.
I'm sure that's true, and I agreed with the government's first aid package to the industry, which consisted mainly of cheap loans to compensate for the freeze on credit. I'd also support a measure of subsidy provided it came with conditions on what it could be used for, especially in terms of producing cleaner and more efficient vehicles. But directly subsidising purchases of new vehicles - and not only those produced in this country - I don't agree with.
Tbh my other objection is a rather more selfish one. I'm a classic car enthusiast. This isn't going to affect vehicles that already have a following, but I can see it taking a lot of cars off the road that are currently regarded just as 'old bangers' but might in future become collectable. There'll never be all that many - you see few twenty-year-old vehicles on the road as it is - and as such they're hardly a great issue in terms of emissions or road safety, but I this this could end up reducing their numbers still further and making life harder for those who do maintan older cars for a hobby.
That has been the case here. The other side of this coin is that the price of these more interesting cars has held steady. Additionally it means that some cars which are, perhaps, not classic are considered worth owning as 'hobby'. cars. For example, an ordinary 1980's Volvo 240 is considered a car worth keeping because there are few of them around, Renault 4's are considered classic. This is alongside of more obviously classic cars e.g. TR6, Golf Mk1, etc.
I like this idea in many ways, as my current car is reaching the end of it's useful life and is nearing scrapping age. I'd probably sell my car on and then get myself a 3k or 4k car instead of a new one, it's a total rippoff.
But the scheme - according to the Times anyway - only pays out if you buy a new or 'nearly new' vehicle, so unless you can find sufficient cash on top of the subsidy to buy a car less than a couple of years old it probably won't be of any benefit to you.
It seems to me that it will create an incentive for people to trade in much older cars - say £500 worth - against new ones, perhaps even buying them specially to do so. Not only will that thin out the ranks of potential future classics (which is my selfish concern), but it could well also make it difficult for those on low incomes to buy any car at all.
Of course, the UK is behind (at least) Germany and France in adopting this policy, so there are more mature models out there for us to consider, albeit more mature by only a few months.
You probably won't - because in theory they should be against it, which puts them in a funny position. They have consistently railed against older cars, but now, with the possibility of millions of them being scrapped at the same time, rather than gradually over time, the environment impact will be significant.
I think there's a bit of a difference there, because the French and Germans traditionally buy cars from manufacturers in their own country, whereas in the UK, we don't. So rather than supporting our own industry, we'll be supporting theirs, and Japan's and Korea's.
Some environmental groups support it, some don't. IMO that reflects the fact that the environmental benefits of it are dubious at best, and either way it's a blatant subsidy to an industry the green lobby don't like very much.
"In all, more than 800,000 UK jobs are reliant on carmaking, which makes up a significant proportion of what is left of the country's manufacturing sector."
I wonder what effect it'll have on the ability to get parts from breakers for the older cars that people do hang onto? I suppose it depends on how they're recycled - melted down or broken down for parts...
Am also wondering if it applies to motorbikes, suspect not. It might make more environmental sense if you could trade in a car against the cost of a scooter or motorbike.
...but not for UK companies.
But the argument is about employment; getting people working, paying taxes, buying good and services . . . You can't discriminate against non-UK registered companies anyway, firstly under EU law, secondly it opens that country up to all kinds of protectionist issues.
Separate names with a comma.