On 2006-08-15 13:50:30 +0100, "Christian McArdle"
said:

I'm definitely in favour of much more punitive taxation for the higher
classes. However, I hope they don't get too arsey with 7 seat Group E
vehicles.

Why?

Fuel savings comes from all the little cars NOT doing the school run,
NOT doing a supermarket run EVERY DAY and not doing 100 mile commutes
every day.

By taxing at a rate that is greater than proportionate to use, you are
more likely to affect behaviour.

Except that it doesn't work. People who want to have big, fuel
consuming cars will pay for them.


I just think that the number of seats in a vehicle should be taken into
account to some extent, as the extra seats will take other vehicles off
the road, reducing effective emissions.

I am not sure that that's a logical conclusion. It might be if you
were comparing buses of different sizes. However people use their
cars as a family for the most part. They don't generally provide a
local bus service, except in cases such as a very long run to school
where it might encourage lift sharing among neighbours.

Obviously, this can't be overdone, or people will simply buy cars with
more seats that they don't need.

Is it a question of seats or space though? I like to have a large
vehicle so that I can take stuff around easily. However, I don't want
that many seats.

By dropping a band by having 7 (or possibly 6) seats or more, or
rising a band by having 2 seats or less, the market will actually be
less distorted and the tax more in line with the likely CO2 emissions
per person/km.

Christian.