Burnham steps back from the 2030 electric car target as the cabinet splits

The consultation on the zero emission vehicle (ZEV) mandate closed on Friday 23 October, and the decision on whether to keep the 80% electric target for 2030 now sits with the First Secretary of State rather than the prime minister. EV Powered reported on 25 October that Andy Burnham has recused himself from the decision because of a potential conflict of interest involving his wife, and that Louise Haigh has been handed responsibility for any change. Business Matters carried the same account, sourced to senior industry figures. Downing Street did not comment.

The conflict described in those reports is indirect. Marie-France van Heel recently stepped back as chief marketing officer of Iduna Infrastructure, the parent company of the Manchester charging network Be.EV, and continues to advise the Be.EV board. A charging network has a commercial interest in the pace of electrification, which is what makes the recusal an issue rather than a formality. The reports are careful about the sourcing, and so should anyone reading them.

Why the decision is so contested

The mandate is the mechanism that decides how much of each manufacturer's UK sales must be electric, and the 2030 figure is the sharp end of it. The review, opened on 14 August and closed on Friday, asks whether the trajectory is set at a level the market can deliver. The law as it stands requires 80% of new cars and 70% of new vans to be zero emission by 2030, with the mandate requiring 33% of new cars this year and a full phase out of new petrol and diesel cars by 2030, then 100% zero emission sales by 2035.

Three positions have formed inside government, according to the reports. The Treasury and the business department are said to want the 2030 car target cut to 50%, with the Treasury arguing that a lower number is what it will take to attract overseas manufacturers to build models here. The Department for Transport, led by Heidi Alexander, is reported to favour something nearer 60%. The energy department is said to want the current regime left alone. Each of those positions has a logic: cheap compliance for the industry, a smaller retreat for the climate, and no change at all for the investment certainty argument.

We set out the reported options when they first surfaced, in our piece on the 60% figure, and the mechanics of how the mandate actually works in our review explainer.

What the emissions arithmetic says

The Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU), a thinktank, has put a number on the retreat. Analysis seen by the Guardian finds that cutting the 2030 car target to 50% would add 147 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, which the paper compares to about 58% of the likely emissions from burning all the oil produced by the Rosebank field.

Jess Ralston, an analyst at ECIU, argued in the same piece that weakening the target would not solve the manufacturers' problem, since the competitive pressure is coming from Chinese producers who have scaled electric car manufacturing faster than their European rivals. "With climate concern high among the public after extreme heat and persisting drought, and public support for net zero up above two-thirds, a decision to U-turn could look very odd," she said.

The paper also assembles the consumer side of the argument. About 28% of new car sales last month were electric only, a full tank of fuel costs around £120, and electric drivers pay roughly 2.4p a mile. Polling by the Electric Vehicle Association found 94% of electric car drivers reporting that they save money compared with petrol or diesel, with a similar share saying they would stay electric for their next car.

What the government says

Its position has not changed in public. "We are reviewing the ZEV mandate to ensure it continues to support British industry and investment, and no decisions have been taken," a government spokesperson told the Guardian, adding that the 2030 phase out and the 2035 zero emission end point remain.

That formula is doing a lot of work. It keeps the review open, keeps the end points intact, and leaves the 2030 number, which is the one manufacturers price their compliance against, undecided. The consultation produced the evidence; the political question of who signs the decision has now been answered in a way nobody expected at the start of the review.

What happens next

Officials from the transport, business and energy departments are expected to meet industry leaders in the coming days to discuss what the consultation produced. The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders has argued throughout that the targets are running ahead of demand, while the charging industry and most analysts argue the opposite, that demand is there and the price of the cars is the obstacle. Whether the new decision-maker accepts either case is now the open question.

For anyone buying a car, the practical position is unchanged this month. The law still says 80% by 2030, and every car registered today is measured against that. What is at stake is what happens to the price of the cars that are not electric, since the discounts manufacturers fund to stay compliant are the mechanism that keeps the mandate working, and a lower target would remove some of the pressure behind them.

Why the decision is so contested

What the emissions arithmetic says

What the government says

What happens next

Sources