Labour to reintroduce grants for electric cars
Drivers will be able to reduce the purchase cost of a new electric car by up to £3,750 for vehicles priced up to £37,000.
Officials hope the measure will encourage more drivers to switch to electric motoring, after Labour pledged to ban the sale of new fully petrol or diesel cars and vans from 2030.
The DfT said 23 new electric vehicle (EV) models were available for less than £30,000.
Heidi Alexander, the Transport Secretary, said: 'This EV grant will not only allow people to keep more of their hard-earned money, it'll help our automotive sector seize one of the biggest opportunities of the 21st century.
'And with over 82,000 public charge points now available across the UK, we've built the infrastructure families need to make the switch with confidence.'
Drivers buying electric cars can benefit from tax breaks if their employer has a company car scheme, but there have been no universally available grants since they were axed by the Conservative government in June 2022.
Labour has been criticised for its pledge on electric cars, with some motorists reluctant to switch to them for fear of being stranded on long journeys.
The grants will be funded through a new £650-million scheme, and the amount buyers can claim will be based on a car's 'sustainability criteria', the DfT said.
The greenest vehicles will be in band one and eligible for grants of up to £3,750, while band two vehicles will receive up to £1,500.
Car manufacturers will be able to apply for the money through the Electric Car Grant from Wednesday.
Simon Williams, the RAC's head of policy, said discounted cars should start appearing at dealerships 'within weeks'.
He added: 'As the biggest savings will be given to cars with the strongest green manufacturing credentials, drivers will be picking models that are not only better for their wallets, but better for the planet too.'
Ian Plummer, commercial director of Autotrader, the online vehicle marketplace, said 'any incentives' to help people buy an electric car were welcome as many drivers were 'put off by the high upfront cost'.
Last week, the DfT announced that road signs for electric vehicle charging hubs would be introduced on major A roads in England.
It also launched a £25 -illion scheme for local authorities to support residents without off-road parking to recharge electric cars using cables connected to their homes, which run along gullies embedded in pavements.
Under the Government's zero emission vehicle (Zev) mandate, at least 28 per cent of new cars sold by each manufacturer in the UK this year must be zero emission, which generally means pure electric.
Across all manufacturers, the figure during the first half of the year was 21.6 per cent.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
26 minutes ago
- The Independent
Workers may not get ‘day one' protection against unfair dismissal despite government pledge
Proposals to give new workers 'day one' protection against unfair dismissal has suffered a heavy defeat in the House of Lords on Wednesday. The defeat is a new blow for the government as the proposals were a Labour manifesto commitment. The House of Lords backed by 304 votes to 160, majority 144, a Conservative -led measure which would instead reduce the existing qualifying period for the workplace safeguard from two years to six months. It was the latest setback suffered by the Labour frontbench to its Employment Rights Bill in the upper chamber and puts peers on a collision course with the administration, given it was an explicit election pledge. The change will be considered by MPs when the draft law returns to the Commons during so-called 'ping-pong', when legislation is batted between the two Houses until agreement is reached. The proposed reforms also give workers other 'day one' rights, such as sick pay, paternity leave and the right to request flexible working. In addition, the Bill would introduce new restrictions on 'fire-and-rehire' processes when employees are let go and then re-employed on new contracts with worse pay or conditions. Business minister Baroness Jones of Whitchurch told peers: 'This Government was elected on a manifesto to provide unfair dismissal protections from day one of employment. 'Not two years, not six months, but day one. 'To deliver this commitment we will remove the qualifying period for these rights.' She added: 'These amendments would not deliver on the Government's manifesto commitment to introduce a day one right against unfair dismissal, leaving many newly hired employees without robust employment protections.' However, Tory shadow business minister Lord Sharpe of Epsom said: 'We are debating a change that will fundamentally alter the balance of risk in hiring, and at a time when unemployment has risen in every month this government has been in power.' He added: 'This clause will do nothing to promote fairness in the workplace. 'It will erode flexibility, it will choke opportunity, and it will harden the barriers that those on the margins already face.' He pointed out the Government's own impact assessment which said that introducing the day one right to claim unfair dismissal 'could damage the employment prospects of people who are trying to re-enter the labour market, especially if they are observed to be riskier to hire', including younger workers with less experience and ex-offenders. Lord Sharpe went on: 'The Government already knows and thinks this so why are they doing this? 'So I don't believe this clause is ready. I don't believe that it's safe, I don't believe that it's wise.' Independent crossbencher Lord Vaux of Harrowden said: 'With this Bill, the Government is knowingly and deliberately damaging the life chances of the most vulnerable, in particular young people trying to get their first step on the employment ladder, and for no apparent tangible benefit. 'I urge them to think again.' The Government was subsequently dealt a further blow as peers backed by 248 votes to 150, majority 98, a change to the legislation, proposed by the Liberal Democrats, which would force ministers to strengthen whistleblower protections.
Daily Mail
27 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
'Brave' frontline interpreter was turned down for sanctuary in Britain until data blunder caused Government to change its mind
Frontline interpreter Jamil was turned down for sanctuary in Britain – but after the data blunder, the Government changed its mind. His story illustrates the tangle British officials have been getting themselves in. He is a former supervisor of UK interpreters, praised for his 'bravery under fire', with one colleague describing him as 'diligent and hard working' and 'an integral part' of operations. When the Taliban seized power in 2021, he was told he could relocate to Britain. He and his family sold their home and possessions and travelled to Islamabad. Then he was one of 1,800 Afghans sent a chilling alert from the British High Commission warning that his personal details could have been compromised. Jamil, 36, a married father-of-one, who worked with UK forces from 2007-11, was even more alarmed when two days later he was told there had been an 'error' and he was 'not eligible' after all – and would be sent back to Afghanistan. With the help of the Mail, lawyers successfully applied for Judicial Review to overturn the decision. It is understood that when details of the data alert he received were put to the closed court, the Government backed down. It is believed there are many similar cases. Last night he told the Mail: 'We hope that finally we can begin a new life in the safety of Britain. I am grateful we have been given a future.' Interpreter's five-year struggle for sanctuary For Khan, the data leak blunder may have opened the door to a new life in the UK. The 35-year-old former interpreter for the UK's Electronic Warfare Signals Intelligence Unit based in Helmand, had been fighting for five years to be allowed to relocate. Despite being shot and stabbed in a Taliban ambush on the outskirts of the Afghan capital Kabul, he had been refused sanctuary because he had been dismissed for smoking in a tent. He had claimed they were 'trumped-up' charges at a time when the UK was looking to cut the number of translators employed before the announcement of a redundancy package. Khan, who said he was repeatedly targeted by the Taliban because he was the 'eyes and ears' of the British forces, fled Afghanistan but was arrested in Turkey and deported. His case was highlighted by the Mail's Betrayal of the Brave campaign and it was taken up by lawyers who launched a Judicial Review. After years of rejection, his case was suddenly allowed and both Khan and his lawyers believe the decision is likely to be linked to the data leak. As he savoured his new life in the UK, Khan said: 'I had suffered a great injustice – I was shot and stabbed because of my work for the UK but still was not allowed sanctuary – now the strength of my case has finally been allowed.'
Daily Mail
27 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
The Afghans left behind... and terrified of ending up on a Taliban kill list
Terrified Afghans tonight accused the British military they served alongside of 'betrayal' as the implications of the data leak to them and their families became clear. One former frontline interpreter couldn't contain his anger as he summed up his shock and disgust, shouting down the line to the Mail: 'We risked our lives for the UK standing beside them day after day. Now they are risking our lives again.' Najeeb, 34, who has been approved for sanctuary under the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP) but is trapped hiding in northern Afghanistan away from his family, branded the data leak a 'betrayal' of personal details entrusted to the British military as part of his relocation application. 'It makes me feel sick,' he said. 'We should have been told as soon as this leak was discovered, not two years later. We should have been rescued earlier. Everyone is terrified. 'I have read reports that the Taliban has this list. I have been tortured by them before and feared I would die. The Taliban does not give second chances. If they know for sure I worked for the UK it could be the end.' He was one of dozens of Afghans to contact this newspaper's award-winning Betrayal of the Brave campaign expressing their fears and anger over the data blunder, revealed only on Tuesday after a near two-year super-injunction kept details under wraps. In the hours before it was lifted, the UK Government sent out urgent warnings to those who may have been compromised, urging them to take extra precautions as the Taliban learned of the debacle. Apologising twice to those who entrusted their personal details to the Ministry of Defence as part of their relocation applications, it warned them to be extra vigilant with phone calls, messages and social media. It urges the Afghans – many of whom risked their lives for Britain on the frontlines – not to tell others their personal details may have been leaked as it could make them more vulnerable as Taliban murders and punishment beatings continue. The warning was met with alarm by those still in hiding in Afghanistan as it also included an alert that the data of their families may also be compromised, although the Government stressed there is no evidence the Taliban has yet obtained it. For many of the thousands still waiting to see if their pleas for sanctuary are successful, it was the first they had heard of the leak. The warning told those potentially at risk: 'We sincerely apologise for this data incident and regret that on this occasion personal data was not safeguarded to the UK Government's standard. We understand that this news may be concerning.' Najeeb's dismay was echoed by fellow translator Wahid, 42, who is hiding with his wife and four children and has waited more than three years to learn if he will be granted relocation. 'This is a disgraceful mistake that will delight the Taliban and makes us all more vulnerable. They will see finding us as a new challenge,' he said. Wahid, who was tortured by the Taliban with electric probes, continued: 'This information includes the details of my family, including my father's name. It increases the chances we will be murdered if we are found and I would appeal to those responsible to take urgent steps to approve more cases and end this hell of uncertainty. 'The Taliban has come for me before and we live in an environment where every noise, every step, every shadow outside could be a threat. It is an awful way to live.' Like Najeeb, he had woken to an email from the MoD on Wednesday warning they could have been part of the leak and provided with a website link to check. To their horror, both men say they received messages back saying: 'Our records indicate that personal data from the reference number you supplied is likely to have been affected by the data leak.' For former interpreter Mashal, 38 – also a Taliban torture victim who was relocated to the UK – the leak, he fears, has put his family at greater risk. His family home has been repeatedly raided by the Taliban, his brother beaten and accused of 'sharing the blood of an infidel spy' (Mashal) and his mother violently questioned. Mashal, who translated for then Prime Minister Gordon Brown during a visit to Kabul, said: 'The data leak is a big mistake that is risking my family's lives. It makes everything more dangerous and it is up to the British to mend what they have broken,' he said. The Taliban is using Chinese-developed eavesdropping tech to monitor phone calls while there has been a crackdown on taking pictures on mobiles.
