Author: PA Media

Two ads for Nissan’s Qashqai hybrid model have been banned for failing to make sufficiently clear the extent to which it needed petrol to run.

The first TV ad, seen in May and September, opened with small text stating: “*e-Power comprises a 100% electric motor-driven system, powered by a lithium ion battery and a petrol engine.”

The ad featured stylised footage of a car driving through a city at night while a voiceover said: “Who said electrification can’t spark excitement when unplugged?”

The second TV ad, seen in June, included an additional closing shot depicting DC superhero The Flash running around two Nissan cars and leaving a trail of sparks in his wake, with a voiceover stating: “Nissan Qashqai and X-Trail with e-Power. Get your own electrical superpower like The Flash.”

Four viewers complained this did not make the car’s source of power sufficiently clear.

Nissan said the ad made clear that the vehicle was part of their “e-Power” range that was neither hybrid nor fully electric but used a petrol engine and lithium-ion battery to power an electric motor which solely turned the wheels.

This was different from conventional hybrids where the wheels were powered by a petrol engine, electric motor, or a combination of both.

Nissan said the ads were no longer being broadcast in the form complained of, and that in future they would include additional wording to clarify that the vehicle was not a fully electric vehicle and required petrol to fuel the electric motor.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) said viewers would understand the ads to mean that the car used “e-Power”, a new, electric technology that did not require it to be plugged in in the same way as electric-powered vehicles.

While the ad did not include any explicit claims in relation to the car’s environmental impact, the ASA said consumers were likely to understand that the car was a better choice for the environment than traditionally fuelled vehicles.

“However, because the ads did not make sufficiently clear the nature of the vehicle’s power source and because it required petrol to power the electric motor, which would produce tailpipe emissions, we considered that the ads were also misleading in this regard,” the ASA said.

“We concluded that the ads did not make sufficiently clear the extent to which the car required petrol and were therefore misleading,” the watchdog concluded.

It ruled that the ads must not appear again in their current form, adding: “We told Nissan to ensure that their future ads made sufficiently clear the nature of a vehicle’s power source.”

Nissan said: “We are disappointed with the ruling made by the ASA although of course we will respect their decision.

“We remain fully committed to helping our customers understand the different technologies available to them, including hybrid, e-Power and full electric. e-Power uses a petrol engine and a lithium-ion battery to power an electric motor. The electric motor alone drives the wheels, providing a uniquely exciting technology that brings customers who are not quite ready for a fully electric vehicle as close to the excitement of EV driving as possible.”

More than 600,000 British drivers face disqualification with “one touch of their phone”, a road safety charity has warned.

Analysis of official data obtained by IAM RoadSmart found that 547,287 drivers had six points on their licence as of August 5, and a further 94,088 had nine points.

The punishment for illegally using a mobile phone behind the wheel was toughened in 2017.

Those caught face six penalty points and a £200 fine.

Drivers who accumulate 12 or more points within three years are usually handed a six-month ban.

Varying amounts of points are handed out for motoring offences, such as three for using a vehicle with defective brakes, between three and six for speeding and 10 for drug-driving.

The number of drivers with six and nine points on their licence was 6% and 8% higher than a year earlier respectively.

The figures are based on analysis of a response to a freedom of information request to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) shared with the PA news agency.

Virtually all hand-held use of mobile phones on Britain’s roads is banned.

A loophole allowing drivers to escape punishment for hand-held phone use if they were taking a photograph or playing a game was closed by new legislation in March last year.

Department for Transport statistics show 22 people were killed and a further 148 were badly hurt in crashes on Britain’s roads in 2022 where a driver using a mobile phone was a contributory factor.

IAM RoadSmart director of policy, campaigns and standards Nicholas Lyes said: “It is astounding that there are more half a million drivers just one touch of their phone away from a driving ban.

“Anyone with six points on their licence that is tempted to text or take a selfie on their phone is not only risking a ban but is a potential danger to themselves and other road users.

“A pinging phone can be a massive distraction, so it is best to put it out of sight, out of reach and on silent.

“Drivers with any number of points on their licence – but especially those with six or nine – should not only evaluate their driving skills but think about the risk a driving ban could have on their livelihoods.

“Thankfully, education and training courses can play a role in making people safer drivers, along with changing behaviours and attitudes.

“There is a widely held suspicion that driving standards are deteriorating.

“The worrying jump in the number of people with points on their licence should be a wake-up call to the Government to roll out new enforcement measures and publish their updated road safety strategy.”

Some cyclists frequently use footage recorded by their head cameras to report illegal mobile use to police.

Michael van Erp, who runs the CyclingMikey YouTube channel, said he has reported 1,555 drivers for motoring offences since 2019, resulting in a total of 2,161 penalty points being handed out.

Annual revenues from council parking operations in England have reached nearly £1 billion, new figures show.

AA analysis of Government data published on Thursday found that English local authorities made a surplus of £962 million in the 2022/23 financial year.

That comprised of £673 million from on-street parking and £289 million from car parks.

The total for both types of parking was just £318 million during the previous 12 months, which was affected by coronavirus travel restrictions.

In 2018/19, before the pandemic, councils recorded a surplus of £936 million, which included £364 million from car parks.

AA head of roads policy Jack Cousens said: “Once again, official statistics show that councils have turned parking into a huge cash cow, not just a service to stimulate local trade and support workers and visitors.

“However, the nearly £75 million, or 20% crash in the surplus from car parks must be particularly worrying for cash-strapped councils.

“While the Covid fallout such as people working from home and the economic downturn are factors in the decline, hikes in parking charges by councils have contributed and helped to drive more shoppers online.

“In effect, many local authorities are killing the goose that lays the golden egg.”

Councils’ parking management involves operational costs but money is received through charges and fines.

A spokesman for the Local Government Association, which represents councils in England and Wales, said: “Income raised through parking charges is spent on running parking services.

“Any surplus is spent on essential transport projects, including fixing the £14 billion road repairs backlog, reducing congestion, tackling poor air quality and supporting local bus services.

“Motorists can avoid fines by ensuring they observe parking and traffic rules that are only there to help all drivers get around and find parking safely, smoothly and fairly.”

The proportion of new cars registered last month that were battery electric was lower than a year earlier, new figures show.

Just 16.6% of registrations in September were pure electric compared with 16.9% in the same month in 2022, the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders said.

At least 22% of new cars sold by manufacturers in the UK next year must be zero emission under the Government’s zero-emission vehicles (ZEV) mandate.

The decline in the market share of battery electric new cars last month was driven by a 14.3% decrease in registrations by private buyers.

Purchases for fleets rose by 50.6%.

The overall new car market increased by 21.0% in September with 272,610 vehicles registered.

September is traditionally a strong month for car sales due to the introduction of new number plates.

Under the ZEV mandate, manufacturers that fail to meet thresholds and do not make use of flexibilities – such as carrying over allowances from previous years – will be required to pay the Government £15,000 per polluting car sold above the limits.

Last month, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak delayed the ban on the sale of new petrol and diesel cars and vans from 2030 to 2035.

SMMT chief executive Mike Hawes said: “A bumper September means the new car market remains strong despite economic challenges.

“However, with tougher EV targets for manufacturers coming into force next year, we need to accelerate the transition, encouraging all motorists to make the switch.

“This means adding carrots to the stick – creating private purchase incentives aligned with business benefits, equalising on-street charging VAT with off-street domestic rates, and mandating charge point rollout in line with how electric vehicle sales are now to be dictated.

“The forthcoming Autumn Statement is the perfect opportunity to create the conditions that will deliver the zero-emission mobility essential to our shared net-zero ambition.”

Ian Plummer, commercial director at online vehicle marketplace Auto Trader, said: “The big question is how some players in the industry reach 22% by the end of next year under the new ZEV sales mandate.

“Many face a difficult choice between selling fewer petrol and diesel vehicles, paying hefty fines or buying credits from all-electric new market entrants such as BYD, Tesla and Polestar.

“To square that circle, we could see prices come down to encourage consumer demand further.”

Alex Buttle, co-founder of used car marketplace Motorway.co.uk, said: “The majority of EV registrations are still from fleet users taking advantage of the favourable benefits offered to company car buyers.

“If the Government could now provide similar incentives to private buyers, we could see EV sales surge even further and the switchover accelerate in the run up to 2035.”

RAC spokesman Rod Dennis said: “We believe it’s vital the Government shows its commitment to zero-emission driving and doing its bit to sustain demand by stimulating the less expensive end of the new electric car market.

“A refreshed plug-in car grant would go a long way towards helping more drivers switch to electric cars sooner.”

The BBC has denied reports it has axed Top Gear after presenter and former cricketer Andrew Flintoff was injured during filming last year.

The Sun reported on Friday that the BBC has told production staff to look for other work following the incident at the show’s test track Dunsfold Aerodrome last December.

A BBC spokesperson told the PA news agency: “A decision on the timing of future Top Gear shows will be made in due course with BBC Content.”

Former England captain Flintoff, 45, widely known by his nickname Freddie, was filmed on Wednesday speaking publicly for the first time since the accident in a clip released by England Cricket on social media.

In the video, where he awarded an England cap to spin bowler Tom Hartley, Flintoff said: “It gives me so much pleasure to share what is going to be a day Tom that you’re going to remember for the rest of your life.”

Flintoff also touched on the incident and added: “They’ll (England Cricket team) share the good times with you, the successes. But as I found over the past few months, they’ll be there in the hardest times of your life, they will stand next to you.”

Filming for series 34 of Top Gear was halted after the accident, and the BBC said in March that it would be inappropriate to resume making the series at that time following an internal investigation into what happened.

Flintoff’s son Corey said at the time he was “lucky to be alive” and described it as a “pretty nasty crash”.

Former sports star Flintoff began presenting Top Gear in 2019.

A motorway services in West Yorkshire has been ranked the worst in Britain for the second year in a row.

Hartshead Moor East is the least popular motorway services out of 120 analysed, according to a survey of more than 30,000 visitors by watchdog Transport Focus.

The Welcome Break-owned site on the M62 near Huddersfield received an overall satisfaction rating of just 84%.

The services is on the busiest route across the Pennines from Lancashire to Yorkshire.

Transport Focus said in its report: “The MSA (motorway service area) has invested in new toilet facilities but, unfortunately, the works were still under way during the survey period and for some of the time had portable toilets in place.

“Despite the building works, the site’s overall satisfaction score has improved by four percentage points, which suggests that there is every reason to expect an improved position in next year’s survey.”

The survey took place between May 17 and July 11.

A spokeswoman for Welcome Break said: “We are disappointed to see Hartshead Moor at the bottom of the list but are incredibly proud of the improvements that Welcome Break has made since last year, with overall satisfaction for Welcome Break increasing by three percentage points to 94%, and toilet satisfaction increasing by six percentage points to 91%.

“During the time of the survey, Hartshead Moor was undergoing improvements and there were temporary toilet facilities in place, but we’re now very pleased to say that the site has opened brand new toilets on both sides of the M62, with two new baby changing units, two new accessible toilets and added HGV shower facilities.

“Therefore, we expect to see a considerable improvement in scores for Hartshead Moor in next year’s survey.”

The joint-second worst services were Bridgwater (on the M5 in Somerset), Hartshead Moor West, Lancaster South (on the M6 in Lancashire) and Toddington North and South (both on the M1 in Bedfordshire).

They each received a score of 88%.

The ranking was topped by Moto’s Rugby services on the M6 in Warwickshire for a second consecutive year.

It was the only location to score 100% after being rated highly for its food and drink, toilets and friendly staff.

The average satisfaction score given by all users of services was 94%, up from 93% last year.

This includes 63% who said they were very satisfied.

Value for money of refreshments available to eat in at the site was a key area of concern, with just 64% of respondents describing it as fairly or very good.

In contrast, some 92% of visitors were satisfied with the toilets.

Transport Focus chief executive Anthony Smith said: “Our survey shows motorway services offer a great experience with friendly and helpful staff and provide drivers with the opportunity to rest, relax and take a break before continuing their journey.

“But there is still room for improvement, including making sure the range of food and drink on offer is good value for money for visitors as cost of living increases continue to bite.”

Scotland will have to push back its ban on new petrol and diesel cars to 2035 after Prime Minister Rishi Sunak announced a delay to his plan, the SNP has said.

Dave Doogan, the party’s energy spokesman at Westminster, said the Scottish Government will not be able to stick to its target of ending the sale of new petrol and diesel vehicles by 2030 because the country is “snared” into the UK Internal Market Act.

Mr Sunak on Wednesday eased a series of green pledges, including pushing back the ban by five years to 2035.

In an interview on BBC Radio Scotland’s Good Morning Scotland programme, the SNP MP was asked how the Prime Minister’s announcement affects the Scottish Government target.

Mr Doogan said: “We will have to move to 2035 because even if the Scottish Government did have the authority to intervene in that particular legislation, which is reserved to the Department for Transport and its agencies, principally the DVLA, we are snared in the United Kingdom into the Internal Market Act, which would see the UK Government intervene in any policy undoubtedly which created a difference between the market in Scotland and the market in the rest of the United Kingdom.

“What we’d have to be very careful if we decided to do that is that we didn’t put our motor manufacturing retail business at a strategic disadvantage by operating in a way that was completely different to that which was in England, resulting in cross-border trade to access vehicles that you couldn’t access in Scotland, so it’s a complex dynamic and of course at the base of all of this is the fact that the UK Government didn’t consult the Scottish Government on any of this.”

Mr Doogan described the UK Government decision to push the ban back to 2035 as an “unprecedented tragedy for the automotive industry in the United Kingdom”.

He said: “The market environment was set out by the Conservative Government in 2020 and industry has been gearing up and tooling up and investing in that market environment, only to find out as of yesterday from the Prime Minister that they’re actually now operating in a completely different environment.

“They’ve been establishing a market supply chain that will provide a greater proportion of electric vehicles by a time of around 2030, where now UK consumers will be in a position to continue to buy internal combustion engine cars, so they’ll have a mismatch between market demand and product availability that they’ve been tooling up for on the basis of Government market instruction.

“I don’t think it can be underestimated how foolish and irresponsible it is for the UK Government to create a market environment and then three years later create an entirely different market environment.”

An urgent question on the issue will be answered in the Scottish Parliament on Thursday.

Douglas Lumsden, net-zero spokesman for the Scottish Conservatives, said the Prime Minister is being “honest” with people, adding: “It’s about delivering net zero in a sensible way, pragmatic way that doesn’t place all of the cost and burdens on ordinary working people.”

He also told the programme: “We’re not falling asleep at the wheel. If you look at changes to the cars for example, that’s just bringing us in line with the rest of the EU.

“In the key area of us reducing our emissions, we are still leading the way.”

The issue was raised during First Minister’s Questions on Thursday, with Deputy First Minister Shona Robison – who was standing in for Humza Yousaf as he visits New York – hitting out at the PM’s announcement while she was questioned by Scottish Tory leader Douglas Ross on the environment.

Ms Robison said: “Douglas Ross is very brave going on this subject today, in a week where his Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has essentially pulled the rug from under the net zero ambitions, not just of the UK, but potentially damaging the net zero ambitions of Scotland.

“That doesn’t just damage the environment, it damages jobs into the process and he should be ashamed to stand side by side with Rishi Sunak on that matter.”

She went on to say that Mr Yousaf’s “ambitions are to meet the net zero targets, showing leadership, unlike the Prime Minister who’s ditching net zero targets”, as she urged Mr Ross to “grow a backbone”.

In response to a later question from Green MSP Mark Ruskell, Ms Robison said the shift by the PM is an attempt to appeal to the Tories’ “core vote”, adding: “Which is essentially culture wars, anti-migrants and now anti-environment.

“What an unappealing, negative, backward-looking, small-minded prospectus that is and it will be roundly rejected by the Scottish people once again.”

The UK Government has been asked for comment.

Councils could be blocked from fining drivers under a crackdown on the “misuse of so-called 15-minute cities”, Transport Secretary Mark Harper has said.

Speaking from the main stage of the Tory party conference, the Cabinet minister announced the Government will review its powers to prevent “overzealous use of traffic management”.

The global concept of 15-minute cities is based on having shops, services and workplaces within a short walk or bicycle ride from people’s homes.

Mr Harper said: “I’m calling time on the misuse of so-called 15-minute cities.

“There’s nothing wrong with making sure people can walk or cycle to the shops or school, that’s traditional town planning.

“But what is different, what is sinister and what we shouldn’t tolerate is the idea that local councils can decide how often you go to the shops, and that they ration who uses the road and when, and they police it all with CCTV.

“So today, I am announcing that the Government will investigate what options we have in our toolbox to restrict overzealous use of traffic management measures including cutting off councils from the DVLA database if they don’t follow the rules.”

Some people believe 15-minute cities are a conspiracy led by the World Economic Forum and the United Nations to use surveillance to limit travel.

In September last year Oxford City Council approved the idea of having essential services within a 15-minute walkable distance as part of its 20-year development plan.

Opponents of the concept linked the policy to proposals for city centre traffic restrictions by the separate Oxfordshire County Council.

Mr Harper did not specify whether the potential blocking of councils from using DVLA data would be limited to those in England or across the UK.

Transport policy is largely devolved in the UK, but the DVLA is an agency within the Westminster Government’s Department for Transport.

The DVLA holds details of the registered keepers of vehicles licensed in the UK.

It discloses this information to private or public sector organisations and individuals providing they can demonstrate a reasonable cause to have it.

Councils use the database to issue fines when their CCTV systems record the number plate of a vehicle whose driver is committing a motoring offence.

The Local Government Association was approached for a comment.

Mr Harper gave more details of plans to curb the use of 20mph speed limits, which were first revealed last week.

He said it “can’t be right” that these zones are “imposed without proper local consent”.

He went on: “We will change the Department for Transport’s guidance, requiring councils to only use 20mph zones where there is a good reason and underlining that 30mph is the default speed limit on urban roads.”

Mr Harper added: “It’s also time to put a stop to some councils using unfair fines as a money spinner.

“We’ll put a stop to councils profiting from traffic offences, clawing back revenue and removing any temptation to exploit you for profit.”

Mr Harper reiterated that “no Government money” would be used to fund low traffic neighbourhoods – where motorised vehicles are banned from some streets – and pledged to “help councils tackle the menace of potholes”.

RAC head of policy Simon Williams said: “Being clearer with councils on important issues that affect drivers around traffic management – whether that’s the use of 20mph limits, implementing low traffic neighbourhoods or the enforcement of yellow boxes – is positive as, after all, eight in 10 say they would struggle to get by without a car.

“These measures will hopefully bring some much-needed consistency to how drivers are treated, as well as avoiding situations where potholes get left unattended for months.”

Nicholas Lyes, director of policy at charity IAM RoadSmart, said: “While broadly being good news for drivers and riders, scrapping certain policies shouldn’t mean that road safety is sacrificed at the altar of getting vehicles moving.

“Locally led schemes which reduce collisions on our roads, such as targeted 20mph limits, need to be supported with good quality infrastructure.

“The Government needs to be clear in its guidance and allow local authorities to push forward with schemes to reduce road casualties.”

Putting in place “blanket” 20mph speed limits means drivers are less likely to slow down on roads where there is a school or children are playing, the Transport Secretary has said.

Mark Harper said widespread use of a 20mph limit “damages the ability” for the zones to have an impact on roads where a lower speed is required for safety reasons because drivers are “less likely to comply”.

The Department for Transport (DfT) announced on Friday that guidance would be reviewed on the use of 20mph limits in England to “prevent their blanket use in areas where it is not appropriate”.

It comes after the Labour-run Welsh Government dropped the default speed limit from 30mph to 20mph for restricted roads in a move it predicts could save up to 100 lives and 20,000 casualties in the first decade.

The Transport Secretary told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “We want to stick with the position where 20mph speed limits make perfect sense, for example, outside a school or in a heavily built-up area where you might have children playing in a residential area or where there is a particular issue with accidents.

“In those areas it makes perfect sense.

“What we are against, and what we are looking at strengthening guidance about, is avoiding the blanket imposition of a 20mph speed limit like we’ve seen in Wales.”

He said 20mph had been imposed “irrelevant to the conditions” on some roads in Wales.

Mr Harper added: “(That) makes life harder for drivers, doesn’t deliver any benefits, actually damages the ability of 20mph speed limits to make people safer because if you put them in inappropriate places, actually people are less likely to comply even when they make sense.”

The Conservative Cabinet minister told Times Radio that a study commissioned by the DfT indicated a reduction to 20mph “doesn’t actually make much difference” to driver speeds.

The study published in November 2018 found 20mph limits in residential areas were supported by the majority of residents and drivers.

The report concluded there was no evidence of a significant drop in the number of crashes and casualties after the introduction of 20mph limits.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said he was “slamming the brakes on the war on motorists” after announcing a slew of pro-driving policies ahead of the Tory conference, starting in Manchester on Sunday.

He tweeted: “We are a nation of drivers.

“Most of us use a car every day and, for many, life would be difficult without their car.

“But too often, drivers feel under attack. That changes today with a long-term plan to improve drivers’ experience on the road.”

The package of measures, as well as stronger guidance on 20mph speed limits, will also include similar action on low traffic neighbourhoods in England to “focus on local consent”, according to DfT officials.

A National Parking Platform pilot will be rolled out, meaning drivers should only have to use one app to pay for parking instead of downloading multiple versions.

Charges will be applied on utility firms that dig up roads during peak times, with the extra money used to fix potholes.

Guidance will be strengthened to make sure bus lanes only operate “when necessary” and a consultation will be launched on motorcycles using bus lanes, the DfT has confirmed.

Labour’s shadow transport secretary Louise Haigh — referencing the criticism Mr Sunak received after saying he had scrapped a policy of households needing seven bins — said the 20mph announcement was “yet another ban on something that doesn’t exist”.

She tweeted: “Mark Harper cannot offer a single example of a 20mph zone that will change under this announcement.”

RAC head of policy Simon Williams said: “It’s extremely positive to see issues that affect the nation’s 33 million car drivers being given such prominence ahead of a general election.

“At the same time, it is important to consider the needs of all road users, particularly as many drivers can also be pedestrians, cyclists and bus riders, and vice versa.

“While this will always be a balancing act we have to match competing priorities such as safety, time-efficient travel with tackling traffic congestion and improving air quality.”

A proposed £5 congestion charge in Cambridge will not be taken forward amid a lack of political consensus.

It had been suggested that the measure could help fund public transport improvements in the city, but in a public consultation some people said the charge would be “unfair or punitive”.

In the public consultation, 58% of respondents opposed the charge.

Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP), a body of elected representatives from local councils and university and business representatives, is not taking the proposal forward.

The executive board debated the proposal in a meeting on Thursday.

Elisa Meschini, chairwoman of the board, said: “It seems completely clear from the debate that’s gone on that we are not in a position to recommend that the county council receive the scheme for further work.

“As a result that recommendation today will not be made.”

She said there are “problems in our region, we’ve got to fix them”, adding: “Those who say we absolutely can do that, then step up your game.”

Other options to be explored include a workplace parking levy.

Liberal Democrat councillor Brian Milnes, of South Cambridgeshire District Council, said the area’s Lib Dems had “announced that they have reservations over the scheme”.

“I have to take that into account in assessing whether there’s any point, frankly, of putting it forward to the county council for approval,” he said, before confirming he did not recommend taking it forward.

Labour councillor Mike Davey, of Cambridge City Council, said that “four weeks ago the South Cambs Lib Dem group made a decision” not to support the congestion charge proposal.

He said it was “pointless proposing something that could not possibly happen” so did not feel the proposal should go forward to the county council.

Andy Neely, university representative on the GCP, said: “I think it’s clear there’s not political consensus at this particular point in time.

“It’s a shame the politics have got in the way.

“This is, as we talked about, a controversial thing.

“I think when you look at the data and the number of people in the younger generation that supported the proposals, the comment made earlier was that in 10 years’ time people won’t necessarily thank us for this.

“But at this particular moment it seems to be there’s not enough consensus to go forward.”