Here it comes - the 'Scrappage Scheme'

[The Main]

Hello everyone,

 

Haven't posted on here in ages, just don't seem to have had the time of late. But I was more than a little concerned when I tuned in to the Chris Evans show on Radio 2 today. So here goes:

 

Paul Williams, Chairman of the Retail Motor Industry Federation was on there, chatting to Chris about how he is trying to secure more government support to help Britain's ailing motor manufacturers and retailers.

 

Among other proposals, the RMIF are petitioning the government (via Lord Mandelson) to introduce a 'Scrappage Scheme'. He argues that this should involve a government subsidy so that all cars over 10 years old can be traded in for a minimum payment of £2,500 against the retail value of a new car (or a car less than 12 months old). He argues that the 'positive' effect will be two-fold:

 

1) this will give the manufacturers a better chance of shifting the current stockpiles of new cars as every low-value old 'banger' suddenly becomes worth £2,500 against a new car

2) it will benefit the whole of society in that it will help get older cars off the road, to be replaced by new, more 'environmentally-friendly' vehicles.

 

When it was pointed out to him that effectively the British taxpayer would be subsidising those who are sufficently well-off (and who desire) to buy a new car, Mr Williams argued that everyone in the UK would benefit - because it would mean less pollution for everyone, 'by getting the older cars off Britain's roads'.

 

Worryingly, Mr Williams stated that talks with the government are well-advanced and that he will be meeting with Lord Mandelson again next week to further discuss these proposals.

 

A quick look at the RMIF website backs this up:

 

RMIF Chairman Paul Williams met with Lord Mandelson, Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise, and Regulatory Reform in November. At the meeting Paul Williams outlined the need to enact the following measures, with progress as indicated:

 

2. Introduction of a Scrappage Scheme that would encourage owners to dispose of older and more polluting vehicles, in favour of newer vehicles.

The RMIF will shortly be presenting a paper to Government that puts the case for a Scrappage Scheme in the UK that mirrors those successfully adopted in other EU states. This RMIF initiative is gathering momentum.

So let me get this straight. A guy moves house and finds he now has to commute a lot further to work, and wants a car his partner is happy to drive too. So he decides to sell his everyday Ford Corsair and buy a modern instead. He thought he'd easily sell it on the 'classic' market for about £2,000 but finds this a bit more difficult than he'd anticipated as the market is very flat right now. The most he's offered is £1,200 for it. In the meantime, his missus pops into the local 'Car World' dealership where the spotty kid in the cheap suit gleefully points out that he can give her £2,500 cash (taxpayers money, too!) for the Corsair against the 9 month old Eurobox she's got her eye on. Providing they scrap the Corsair of course. I wonder what happens next, eh? Nice.

 

So what happened to the (correct) notion that the majority (80%?) of the pollution created by a vehicle results from it's manufacture? Are we seriously being told that taxpayers are going to subsidise the destruction of perfectly decent cars (which happen to be more than 10 years old) in order to increase 'demand' for new ones?

 

I wondered when something like this would happen - how the *%$& can it make sense to pay someone to scrap a car, just so we have to build another one to replace it? Isn't it about time the motor industry just admitted it's produced so many wankbuckets over the past few years that they just can't sell them and shut up?

 

This has really wound me up - I've taken the liberty of posting this on the Practical Classics forum too, just to make sure those guys know about it as well. Pah!

[Guest]

Oh dear. I've just read an account of how a family in France have managed something like 3500 eur off a new car by sacrificing their daughter's first set of wheels, a "25 year old Peugeot" that had one careful previous owner. Saddens me to visualise a tidy 104 getting crushed in favour of a moribund new Twingo or something.

[Guest]

It's OK because if it's going through Mandelson he'll have to resign before anything happens.

[bigstraight6]

Hmm, desperate measures to try and flog loads of new vehicles that have been sat around in fields for months No matter how it's dressed up, with the 'tempting' £2500 for any old banger, as soon as Mr & Mrs average drive their brand new car out of the showroom it's more than likely lost £2500 in depreciation, and they've commited to credit. Mind you, credit is supposed to be difficult to get in these times, so how will the illustrious chairman of the RMI and slimey magot Mandelson overcome that hurdle....

[RedSparrow]

That's insane!I know they're talking about stockpiles of unsold cars, but 'carbon footprint' wise it is generally better the keep a motor on the road that buy a new one.I work in a museum occasionally. When will people start recognising more that cars are a huge part of our social history?So what if the Metro would be worth £2500 against a new Punto? Ill keep the Metro ta. Partly because I am aware it is a fairly scarce vehicle.I can't believe they are pissing more public money away to help huge private corporations.I firmly believe there should be a state owned car company knocking out small, cheap and reliable superminis for the masses, undercutting the big companies.I am emigrating ASAP.

[Timewaster]

Its on its way, Germany are doing it already I believe.I'm really not sure how I feel about all this. If someone were to offer me £2.5k for a shitter that cost me the price of a decent curry I'd pull their arm off!Oh, wait.....Means I've got to buy a new clio. I HATE this idea!Is anyone on here clever enough to calculate the environmental benifits of crushing a perfectly servicable car to replace it with a new one that does 3mpg more?

[The Main]

Well said, gentlemen.What pisses me off most about this is that all taxpayers from the lowest paid upwards would effectively be subsidising the purchase of a new twuntmobile for some twee, middle-class couple who want everyone in the family to have a 59-plate car on the drive.And meanwhile the masses will probably give it the thumbs-up too, because of Paul Williams of the RMIF etc will convince them that building lots more new cars is the 'green' thing to do.

[Richard]

Is anyone on here clever enough to calculate the environmental benifits of crushing a perfectly servicable car to replace it with a new one that does 3mpg more?

There's no point. It's for the benefit of big business, not the environment.To benefit the environment people have to travel less and consume less. That means spending less money and you don't hear many politicians urging us to do that, do you.Since the environment became fashionable in the 1990s we have found countless ways to use more resources. Patio heaters, halogen "security" lights, Chelsea tractors, homes with multiple bathrooms, home computers, the return of V6 family cars, standby buttons, cheap flights, out-of-town shopping centres, disposable kitchens, and, as they used to say in the K-Tel adverts, many many more. The environment, in the eyes of governments and business leaders at least, is nothing more or less than a marketing tool.

[dollywobbler]

Mandleson has said he doesn't see the benefit of such a scheme. Of course, he always sticks to his word...Does my head in too. Ridiculous. It's sod all to do with the environment and all to do with people not buying enough cars, so the manufacturers come crying to the government cap in hand because they didn't have the intelligence to consider that one day, people might think "hold on, this old shitter is doing the job just fine actually. I'll go on holiday instead of buying a pointless new car."

[pogweasel]

FFS. Time to start stockpiling some 'chod' then. When will they realise that forcing folk into monthly credit repayments is what got us into this state in the first place. Not everyone wants to be paying £300 a month fo the next 12 years just to 'save' 3mpg. It's just moronic. I'll stick to my 17 year old 'environmentally unfriendly' car, thanks. 40mpg + comfort + style + space + performance all bought and paid forvs. 45mpg cramped slow horrible wretched '09' car that costs me the equivalent price of my current car every 8 weeks?No contest really.

[55bloke]

This is, as we unanimously agree, total BOLLOCKS!! It makes me VERY angry, but what worries me most of all is that most people seem unable to spot the flawed logic (i.e blatent lies!!) and no in "the media" is saying, "Er, excuse me, but this is nonsense."! SOMEONE should be screaming it from the rooftops.

[caprighia]

For at least a brief time after this genius scheme is introduced our shite is going to rise in value ? My 200 quid Saab would be worth 2500 notes to a new motor buyer, so it would be worth them bunging me 1000 - 2000 for it? Great news for me until I go to replace it - then i find all potential shite has gone up. Jeez

[pogweasel]

For at least a brief time after this genius scheme is introduced our shite is going to rise in value ? My 200 quid Saab would be worth 2500 notes to a new motor buyer, so it would be worth them bunging me 1000 - 2000 for it? Great news for me until I go to replace it - then i find all potential shite has gone up. Jeez

It's not though is it... Even if they shift the stock from muddy fields under this scheme, it will just finish up in some other muddy field, priced a bit lower because someone gambled chopping grot in against it. The massive oversupply isn't going to vanish, just move about.

[Milford Cubicle]

I heard about this while driving one my perfectly serviceable 13 year old cars yesterday. I was so engulfed in rage I had to change the station.

[garethj]

I think it's a great idea, we should do it everywhere. Old cars are bad for the environment and we need to kick start the car sales, scrap everything old and get everyone to buy new.And it's the same for houses! The housing market is in the doldrums and old houses are crap for the environment with all that heat loss, draughty old things! We should knock down all the old houses and get everyone to buy new ones.Anyone in a house over 20 years old should really be forced to have it knocked down and move into a lovely Barratt shoe box. Anyone in a house over 100 years old should really be forced to knock it down and leave all the furniture in it too. None of it will fit in the new build house anyway.Let's start with those old buildings next to the Thames, close to the Millennium wheel, Westminster council should be happy to move the bulldozers in next week?

[Timewaster]

garethj for Prime Minister!Actually - I live in a 24 year old Barratt shoebox. I'm sure they could knock it down (with a stiff breeze) and build 2 even smaller houses on the plot!

[Guest Kyle]

£2.5k for your old car? Hmmmm....So, buy £3k worth of old shitters and swap the whole lot for a new Jag or Porsche.They have been on about this for a good 15 years that I know of, Ford being the biggest force behind this idea. They wanted the government to stump up £1.5k and Ford would knock another grand off the screen price. It met with a lot of resistance, both from the motoring and the green camps.Vauxhall are already running this idea and have been for a while.You would cry if you saw some of the stuff just my local dealer has crushed.

[MrRegieRitmo]

Oh dear. I've just read an account of how a family in France have managed something like 3500 eur off a new car by sacrificing their daughter's first set of wheels, a "25 year old Peugeot" that had one careful previous owner. Saddens me to visualise a tidy 104 getting crushed in favour of a moribund new Twingo or something.

Don't worry, the 104 was finished by 82, must have been a 205!

[Split_Pin]

Spot on there garethj - we need someone high profile to argue this on Question time or something - see what the politician's answer is to that!I'll stick with my 10 year old Vectra too.They can keep their '09' plates or whatever. I and everyone else knows that keeping an older car on the road is better for the environment. Bloody cheaper too if you have even a basic mechanical knowledge like me.

[Mr Lobster]

I wouldn't mind so much if it wasn't for the fact they use the misleading environmental arguement which is just plain bollocks.Thing is, the SMMT / RMT or whoever speaks out on behalf of dealerships. Dealerships who are struggling to sell cars. Maybe it should be / have been a bit more vocal in defending its members interests years ago before the manufacturers forced dealers into spending huge amounts just to keep their franchise and in the process landing the vast majority with an unworkable business model. The company I am unfortunate enough to work for have a LOT of dealerships, some franchised, some not. They calculate that on average they make a 1% return from a franchise, 12% from a none franchised used car site. This seems pretty typical so that dealers can't effectively put a bit away in the good times to see them through the bad times hence why so many are closing their doors at the moment.I just find the whole idea of scrapping 9 year old cars very very wasteful. And as for giving people £2500 of tax payers money to scrap a perfectly serviceable item just to replace it with another is plain stupid. I would hope the government might see sense but then is that really likely?

[wuvvum]

Oh dear. I've just read an account of how a family in France have managed something like 3500 eur off a new car by sacrificing their daughter's first set of wheels, a "25 year old Peugeot" that had one careful previous owner. Saddens me to visualise a tidy 104 getting crushed in favour of a moribund new Twingo or something.

Don't worry, the 104 was finished by 82, must have been a 205!

It was here. It carried on being made in France until 1987.

[pogweasel]

Again, why not just GIVE US £2500 EACH!!!Yes, it sounds really stupid. But somewhere they are actually doing this. Might have been Canada. You queue up, the govt gives you £2500 and off you merrily go to spend it on what you like. I don't doubt alot of folk here WOULD use it to buy acar, whether used or towards a new one, either way it's stimulating the economy without the hocus of environmentalism, or forcing folk into unworkable finance deals. I'd love some random free cash to waste on shite.

[Mr Lobster]

There would definately be some sense in handing out free cash. I guess a fair percentage of it would work its way back to the government via VAT, taxes etc. The rest would one way or another certainly help stim ulate the economy. Even if I was to go out and buy another car, the person whom I buy it from might go buy a new TV or whatever hence helping retailers so presumably everyone wins?I suppose the downside is possible increase in inflation though?£2500 though. That would come in very useful

[Timewaster]

Again, why not just GIVE US £2500 EACH!!!Yes, it sounds really stupid. But somewhere they are actually doing this. Might have been Canada. You queue up, the govt gives you £2500 and off you merrily go to spend it on what you like. I don't doubt alot of folk here WOULD use it to buy acar, whether used or towards a new one, either way it's stimulating the economy without the hocus of environmentalism, or forcing folk into unworkable finance deals. I'd love some random free cash to waste on shite.

I heard this sugested on the radio, I think it was by John McCririck (First sensible thing he has ever said IMHO).Instead of giving the banks all our money (to replace the money they pissed up the wall) Give all of us £10,000 on the condition that we spend it all within 1 month.It sounds workable to me: Some would pay off their debts - so it goes to the banksSome would use it for a deposit on a house - so it goes to the housing marketSome would have work done on their house - happy buildersThe rest of us would buy a car or blow it on a plasma TV or something.Anyone spot a flaw? It wouldn't have to be done all at once. maybe you get it on your birthday or something.

[Richard]

That's pretty much what kept the economy afloat in the 1980s, selling public property at vastly discounted prices.

[Guest]

I reckon we should impose a Logan's Run style mandatory execution at the age of 30, as by then people tend to be getting inefficient and pollute the world with their views on mortgages etc. Get these unsightly old bangers off our streets!

[Richard]

Until about ten years ago I'd have been all in favour of that.

[Mash]

That's nice, £2500 towards a new car. Ta very much.Er, what about the other 6 grand, where do I find that then? Under a stone in the back garden? Oh, I get myself into debt up to my eyeballs and contribute further to the national deficit.No ta, think I'll stick with my £300 Accord.

[michiel]

I don't like the reasoning and the arguments, but...We were planning to buy a tiny new car anyway (probably a once-in-my-life thing), all from our savings; Starlet would make 750 euro tops and then get sent to Angola to make lots of money for an exporter, so if the Dutch government wants to give me 2500 euro for it, who am I to say no? I can buy a nice old shitter for that amount of money!Still don't like the reasoning and the arguments though.

[pogweasel]

IF you need and want a new car then fine fair enough!Though if you were chopping in some premium-grade shit, like a Y-reg ambassador, obv we would get the arse - swap it with one of us for a scrappy-bound 1999 Escort OBVBriefly contemplated buying brand new for Er Indoors last year (Nuova 500) until the news of increased offspring, purely because it wasn't a totally daft idea at the time. I have no beef with folk wanting a new car. Being dictated to that you need a new car is something else...