The MPs that didn't bark
Why didn’t a single Labour MP vote against the Government’s Zero Emission Mandate, when all the evidence shows it will hurt the poorest the most?
On Monday, the Government’s Zero Emission Vehicle Mandate bill, which enforces an 80% target for electric vehicles as a percentage of new car sales by 2030, passed the Commons with only 38 MPs (28 of them Conservatives) voting against it. Not a single Labour MP went through the "no" lobby, despite knowing the Government would have lost the vote if they had.
His Majesty’s loyal opposition, the party created to represent the needs and wishes of the working class, chose not to oppose. Despite the fact that all the evidence shows the race to Zero Emission Vehicles (ZEVs) will hurt the poorest in society the most. Why is that?
ZEVs are significantly more expensive to buy than petrol or diesel vehicles (ICE). MoneySavingexpert.com states the list price of an electric Vauxhall Corsa as £15,000 more than the petrol equivalent. An electric Mini and Volvo XC40 cost nearly £10,000 more.
Even the most bullish forecasts by MIT on the future cost of production of ZEVs expect a mid-sized electric car to be at least £4-5,000 more expensive to the manufacture than combustion engined cars by 2030.
Electric vehicles are not just more expensive to buy they are also more expensive to insure.
According to Confused.com at least 15-20% more expensive than ICE cars and often much more. According to Which, “The comparison site found cover for a Jaguar F-Pace cost an average of £801, compared with £1,013 (+26%) for an electric Jaguar I-Pace (which, it's important to note, costs nearly 50% more to buy).”
Some insurers, for example John Lewis Financial Services, have even stopped insuring electric cars altogether, while they 'analyse the risks and costs involved'. Because as more electric cars are sold, more data is coming through. Data such as the average claim cost.
According to Thatcham Research, insurance claims for EVs are on average 25%+ higher than for petrol or diesel vehicles, whilst damage takes 14% longer to fix. They also note that with the high cost of repairing and replacing batteries, EVs are more commonly written off.
The Institute of the Motor Industry also blames a lack of skilled technicians/mechanics for pushing up claims and servicing costs. Apparently there are now 39,000 EV mechanics in the UK and whilst this figure has been steadily increasing, they still expect a shortfall of at least 16,000 by 2032.
It is evident that the costs of purchase, of repair and maintenance and insurance will remain considerably higher for ZEVs than ICE vehicles way beyond 2030, when the Government’s bill requires 80% of new car sales to be ZEVs. But the bill is even more aggressive than that. From 1 January 2024, 22% of all manufacturers’ new car sales in the UK must be ZEVs. This figure rises to 28% in 2025, 33% in 2026, 38% in 2027, 52% in 2028, 66% in 2029, 80% in 2030 and finally 100% in 2035, when the sale of new petrol, diesel and hybrid cars will be banned completely. For context, the RAC report that only 14% of new vehicle sales in 2022 were ZEV’s.
And these are not just targets either, but targets with a big stick. For each ICE vehicle manufacturers sell above their quota, they will be fined £15,000. Let me repeat that. £15,000 for each and every ICE vehicle they sell above their quota. Manufacturers will simply not be able to afford to sell ICE vehicles. Take the Vauxhall Corsa as an example. The list price of the petrol version, according to MoneySavingExpet.com, is £19,000. Once Vauxhall has reached its quota of non ZEV vehicle sales it would have to pay a £15,000 fine to sell one. The reality is Vauxhall will increasingly stop selling petrol Corsa’s at £19,000. Either you won’t be able to buy one at all or you will be asked to pay the mandated £15,000 fine in the price (coincidentally bringing the petrol Corsa to the exact list price of the EV version).
And this is happening at a time when the evidence suggests car ownership is already becoming too expensive for many. Surveys suggest those who own a car spend on average 13% of their gross income on it. For those paying for their car with a finance or loan deal, this proportion rises to 19%. As people are forced to buy ZEVs this figure will only rise.
So whilst it is crystal clear that the Government’s Zero Emission Mandate will make car ownership increasingly and significantly more expensive (pricing out the poorest in society), not a single Labour MP voted against it. Why?
In short, because the Labour party is no longer the party of Keir Hardie and Aneurin Bevan. No longer the party of the working class. And it hasn’t been for a long time.
In my article on Homeostasis and the death of politics I outline how all political parties – including Labour - have come to be controlled by one small segment of society. A new elite who are generally university educated, employed in the professional or creative classes, live in cities or University towns, are relatively wealthy, and share liberal cosmopolitan values. I call them Metropolitan Progressives.
Professor of Politics Oliver Heath, in his paper “Policy Alienation, Social Alienation and Working-Class Abstention in Britain, 1964–2010”, has looked at this trend. To quote him:
“The number of MPs with a background in manual work has fallen dramatically. In 1964 over 37 per cent of Labour MPs came from manual occupational backgrounds. By 2010 this fell to just under 10 per cent”
Since then, the figure has fallen further. According to Parliament, today only 3% of MPs in the House of Commons have any experience of blue-collar work. In numerical terms, the number of MPs who had working-class jobs before entering politics can today be counted on two hands, whilst conversely nearly 1 in 5 MPs have only ever worked in politics straight from University.
In terms of education, since the 1970s, when a majority of Labour MP’s were non-university educated, the percentage who now have been to university has risen inexorably to over 90%. Indeed, as a percentage, more Labour MPs (and Lib Dems) have been to university than Tory MPs.
The reason our MP’s -- of whichever party -- look the same and sound the same is because they are the same. They come from the same segment of society, the same universities, the same professions. And, unsurprisingly, share the same values and beliefs.
In 2020, UK in a changing Europe did a study exploring voters’ economic and social values, and compared them to the values and beliefs of MPs. Their conclusion was:
On social values, Labour and Conservative MPs are more socially liberal than their voters. Conservative MPs are significantly more socially liberal than the average voter, with Labour even further away.”
Or as Professor David Runciman explained in his piece “The key flaw in our democracy: MPs don’t represent the people”:
This points to the need for a more profound reform of how parliament represents the people. The problem goes deeper than partisan divides: neither of the main parties is able to bridge wider social divisions because both parties are relatively uniform in their make-up.”
It should not come as a surprise, therefore, that with MPs in all parties increasingly drawn from just one segment of society (the metropolitan progressive elite) and sharing the same values and beliefs, they broadly support the same policies. Whether it be outsourcing decision making to non-elected national or international institutions, mass immigration, globalisation, tax rates, attitudes towards the criminal justice system, racing to net zero or forcing consumers into ZEVs- the differences in policy are more presentational than fundamental.
In short, the reason why not one single Labour MP voted against the Government’s Zero Emission Mandate -- despite knowing if they had the bill would have been defeated -- is because they agree with it. And agree with it despite knowing that the policy will hurt the working class the most.
There are not many guarantees in life. Death and taxes are two. But many others we used to rely on no longer apply. Like football being a game of two halves which Germany win on penalties. Or the Labour Party being the party of the working class. Neither truism applies anymore. Two World Cup group stage exits in a row put paid to German football. The metropolitan progressive elite put paid to the Labour Party.