The Observer view on SUVs: they are too dangerous and too big, their drivers should be made to pay
The consequences of this uncontrolled vehicular expansion have become profound. Potholes are being created in greater numbers as our roads are pounded by heavier vehicles; multiple parking spaces are being taken over by single, giant cars; and road accidents are now producing more severe injuries to drivers and passengers of other vehicles. This last issue is of particular concern.
A study by the European Transport Safety Council found that in a collision between a modest-size SUV (sports utility vehicle) weighing 1,600kg and a lighter car weighing 1,300kg, the risk of fatal injury decreases by 50% for the occupants of the heavier car but increases by almost 80% for the occupants of the lighter car. Similarly, pedestrians and cyclists are more likely to be killed if the car that strikes them has a bonnet that is higher off the road than average, a typical feature of an SUV.
The trouble is that sales of these vehicles are booming. In 2024, they accounted for 33% of all registrations, compared with a figure of only 12% a decade earlier. This dramatic change in the use of our roads has led organisations such as the campaign group Clean Cities to call for strict measures to be imposed on car owners. Their argument is straightforward. If a car generates more potholes in our roads, takes up more parking space and poses more danger to pedestrians, cyclists and other car occupants compared with smaller vehicles, then it is only fair that its owner pays more for driving that vehicle.
Paris has already introduced specific parking charges for SUVs. Drivers of these vehicles now have to pay triple the amount of those who drive regular cars. The mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, has indicated that he would support such a scheme for the capital and should be encouraged to pursue the idea with rigour. However, attempts to tackle the problem should not be confined merely to parking. At present, the owners of polluting vehicles have to pay more road tax, based on the carbon dioxide they emit, and drivers of more expensive cars, including electric ones, are also hit with an extra tax.
It may be that these measures will have to be expanded in future, with similar levies being imposed on the owners of SUVs and other vehicles whose sizes exceed specific dimensions.
Sign up to Observed
Analysis and opinion on the week's news and culture brought to you by the best Observer writers
after newsletter promotion
Avoiding such measures could allow a transport problem that has already reached significant levels to become a major crisis. It is an issue that now needs to be considered as a matter of urgency.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
a day ago
- Telegraph
Sadiq Khan has finally met a would-be Mayor worse than him
If New Yorkers needed any more proof that Zohran Mamdani would be a disaster for the Big Apple, the news that he's been comparing notes with Sadiq Khan is surely it. Following Mamdani's shock victory in the Democratic mayoral primary a few weeks ago, in which the self-identified socialist triumphed over disgraced former governor Andrew Cuomo, he has reportedly 'been in touch with a number of progressive mayors', including London's. Khan's advice? Move to the centre, apparently. Having won the primary promising rent freezes and free buses, Mamdani needs now to reassure the moderates, just as Khan did in 2016, when he trounced his Left-wing challengers before taking the fight to Tory candidate Zac Goldsmith. Say what you will about Khan, he has managed to win three elections, albeit in a city that has been a one-party state for some time. Beyond that, he should be keeping his advice to himself, given Calamity Khan has been a disaster for London on every conceivable front. Out-of-control knife crime. The effective decriminalisation of petty theft. Anti-social behaviour apparently becoming mandatory. The inability to easily procure a pint past 11pm on a weekday, even in central London, all while our dearly departed 'night tsar' pocketed £132,000 a year. If this sounds like fun to you, NYC, you're welcome to it. Khan might not be a Leftist in the Mamdani or Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez mould, but his tenure in London has shown us that his supposed 'centrism' can be just as damaging to a great city. While he struggles to handle the fundamentals, from violent crime to building houses to keeping London's nightlife alive, he levies punishing Ulez fines against those who can't afford newer, greener cars, or engages in ostentatious beefs with Donald Trump. His is the politics of virtue-signalling taken to an insulting degree. You might be struggling to pay your rent, but at least we have a mayor who bangs on endlessly about inclusion. You might fear for your son's life as he roams your estate, but at least our Sadiq has told him to call out his 'maaates' if they say anything sexist. When all else fails, we are instructed to shelve all of our piddling concerns and simply bask in the warm feeling of being ruled over by London's first Muslim mayor, as if Khan's faith has anything to do with anything. The crank wing of the Maga crowd were typically hysterical when Mamdani – who is also Muslim – won. Republican representative Marjorie Taylor Green shared an AI image of the Statue of Liberty draped in a burka – just as hard-Rightists over here absurdly suggest that Khan, who has never seen a Pride march he didn't want to join, is some kind of crypto-Islamist. To be honest, having lived in Khan's London for all of his reign, I'd rather go full-blown Sharia than have to sit through another of those insufferable New Year's Eve fireworks displays, celebrating 'diversity' and taking potshots at Brexit. Give me a caliph over a woke troll any day. Who knows? A few severed hands later, shoplifting might finally start getting under control. The Mamdani-Khan confab is yet another reminder of what a mess so-called 'progressives' of various hues seem intent on making of our respective metropolises. The sooner New Yorkers and Londoners alike wake up to this, the sooner we can make our cities great again.
Telegraph
a day ago
- Telegraph
Khan branded a coward after refusing TV debate with Farage
Sir Sadiq Khan has been accused of 'cowardice' after refusing a televised debate with Nigel Farage on crime in London. The Labour Mayor of London turned down Mr Farage's offer of a head-to-head showdown as it emerged that shoplifting in the capital had risen by more than half in the past year. It comes after the Reform UK leader launched a 'six-week offensive' of policy announcements with a particular focus on crime and punishment. Mr Farage told The Telegraph: 'Labour have been in government for over a year. 'Sadiq Khan has nowhere to hide any more – the blame for his record in office lies solely at his feet. He has failed Londoners. London is lawless and London needs Reform.' However, a spokesman for Sir Sadiq dismissed Mr Farage's offer as a 'political stunt' and claimed the Mayor was 'too busy working for Londoners to get crime down' to take part. The Reform leader replied: 'It's just extraordinary and cowardly, and everyone knows that London is becoming lawless. What is Khan afraid of? I don't bite.' A crime survey released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) last week found shoplifting in London had increased by 53 per cent over the last 12 months to March. The rise was the steepest of anywhere in the country, while London also accounted for 16,344 knife crime incidents, an annual rise of nine per cent. London also accounted for a third of all knife offences in England and Wales. A spokesman for Sir Sadiq said: 'The Mayor is too busy working for Londoners to get crime down to get involved in political stunts. 'Nothing's more important to the Mayor than keeping Londoners safe. Sadiq is determined to do all he can to tackle crime and its complex causes, which is why he has invested record sums in the police and in providing positive opportunities for young people. 'Sadiq is building on the progress that's been achieved in London with the number of young people being injured with a knife, homicides, lethal barrel discharge, and burglary all down since 2016.' The Mayor's office said the number of teenage murders in London was at its lowest rate since 2003, while the number of under-25s killed was at its lowest since 2013. Sir Sadiq's spokesman added: All this has been achieved despite government austerity since 2010.' At a press conference last week, Mr Farage pledged to send Britain's worst offenders to jail in El Salvador as part of a five-year plan to halve crime rates. The £17.4 billion scheme, which also seeks to boost police numbers and prison places, would see the introduction of new rules to increase the number of jail sentences handed down by judges. The El Salvador idea is based on a similar policy by Donald Trump, who is paying the Latin American country billions of dollars to house offenders. Sir Sadiq holds direct responsibility for policing in London as the city's mayor and de facto police and crime commissioner. Under his watch, violent crime has soared from 190,000 incidents in 2016/17, when he first came to power, to 250,000 in 2023/24. Transport for London's crime and anti-social behaviour report in 2023 showed a total rise in offences of 56.5 per cent. This included a 158 per cent jump in crimes involving offensive weapons and a 107 per cent rise in robbery. Sir Sadiq is planning to shut the front counters in 13 of the 32 Metropolitan Police stations that are open 24 hours a day. He had pledged in his 2024 mayoral election manifesto to 'maintain a 24-hour police front office counter in every borough'. However, he said he would need to sign off on the closures and claimed government spending plans had left the Met with a £260 million black hole in his budget. Eleven more of the 32 stations would switch to reduced opening hours, leaving just eight front counters staffed around the clock.
Telegraph
a day ago
- Telegraph
Khan seeks to build on more than 100 square miles of green belt
More than 100 square miles of green belt surrounding London are under threat from Sir Sadiq Khan 's development plans. Analysis by The Telegraph shows as much as 131 square miles of London's green space is at risk from Sir Sadiq's attempts to build more homes around the capital after repeatedly missing targets. The analysis, based on preparations ahead of the mayor's New London Plan – a document described by City Hall as a 'blueprint for development' – shows parks, green spaces and areas of 'limited biodiversity' are at risk of losing their protections. This means that housing developers could move in, buy the land and construct homes on it with little allowable opposition from residents. Much of the green belt land is found in Outer London, where voters are more likely to support the Conservatives. When it comes into force in 2027, the New London Plan, which removes areas of the green belt from protected status, could enable developers to concrete over parks, playing fields and other green spaces, critics say. Fields in Trust, the UK's only charity dedicated to protecting parks, playgrounds, sports fields, and green spaces, said there was 'a troubling pattern of policy decisions that put short-term financial pressures ahead of our children's long-term health and wellbeing'. Helen Griffiths, its chief executive, said: 'Planning reforms are already putting thousands of parks and green spaces at risk. These spaces are not surplus, they are vital to the future health and wellbeing of our children. Once lost, they are gone forever.' While much of the green belt is not under Sir Sadiq's direct control, as it falls outside of the London boundary, he has already pledged to go further than the Government on the release of green land. This action has been taken despite the existing planning permission for 300,000 homes in the city, not on protected land, that are yet to be constructed. A spokesman for the mayor confirmed the plans and said that 'in May, [Sadiq] announced the bold decision to actively explore releasing parts of London's green belt for development'. They added that Londoners 'are suffering the consequences of a perfect storm in housebuilding created by the last government – including a lack of national funding, high interest rates, spiralling building costs, delays from bodies like the building safety regulator and the lasting impact of Brexit'. Sir Sadiq's pledge means that green belt land within the boundary of Greater London is more at risk than in other parts of the country, such as Kent, Surrey and Sussex. Speaking to The Telegraph, David Simmonds, shadow minister for local government, accused Sir Sadiq and Labour of wanting to 'bulldoze the soul of London' with Angela Rayner, the Housing Secretary, 'cheering him on'. He warned that 'parks, outdoor sport and green spaces that define our neighbourhoods are now in Labour's crosshairs'. However, the mayor's office said that any release of land would have strict conditions to make the 'best use of land [and] increase the quality and accessibility of green spaces'. The green belt, which surrounds the city, makes up 22 per cent of the city's land, and some boroughs, such as Bromley, have more than half their area designated as protected green belt land. In the first quarter of this year, only 1,210 private homes were built, some 5.5 per cent of the target set by the Government for that quarter.
