Registered user login:

SianBerry

Sian Berry

The Green Party activist and anti-4WD campaigner writes for http://www.newstatesman.com

Sian Berry Homepage

Reports of the death of the 4WD exaggerated

  • Posted by Sian Berry
  • 18 September 2006

News that 4×4 sales are down compared with last year might make you think the Alliance Against Urban 4×4s is about to pack up and go home, but believe me, we still have a long way to go.

For its current issue, trade magazine ‘The Manufacturer’ obtained sales figures for the first half of 2006 from the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders and compared them with figures from 2005. They found something that, at first glance, seems extraordinary: after rising every year for the past decade, 4×4 sales were marginally down.

Cue the headlines. The Evening Standard got hold of the figures and seized upon them to announce that the era of the 4×4 was coming to an end. Using a picture of me putting a fake parking ticket on a Range Rover to illustrate the story, they announced ‘Chelsea tractors driven into decline by public backlash.’

(One of my Green Party colleagues later emailed to ask, “What did they do to that photo to make you look so small?” The answer is nothing. I’m five foot six, not exactly tiny. It’s just that the Range Rover really is very huge indeed.)

Both the Evening Standard and The Manufacturer credited campaigns like ours with the switch this year from massive growth to a small reduction in new 4×4 registrations. The magazine said, “The figures suggest that environmental campaigns to make driving SUVs socially unacceptable have been successful.” This is all very flattering, but the victory party at Alliance HQ is still on hold and here’s why.

Let’s look at those sales figures in more detail. In the first half of 2005, 93,988 new 4×4s were registered in the UK. Between January and June of 2006, this figure was 93,860 – a 0.14% fall. Superficially this compares well with a 13% rise between 2003 and 2004, and a 5% rise last year.

However, the market share commanded by 4×4s continues to go up. This year new car registrations across all sectors are down by more than 4% so you could argue (and the SMMT does) that 4×4 sales are, in fact, holding up well.

And this still means nearly 94,000 new 4×4s are now on the road that weren’t there in January, and that tens of thousands more will join them by the end of this year. Hardly a cast-iron reason to celebrate, although it is a sign that higher fuel prices and more environmental concerns may be starting to affect people’s choice of car.

There’s still an awful lot left for our campaign to achieve. Ideally we’d like to see no-one driving an off-roader around town who isn’t actually going to use it off the road, and we’re realistic about the challenges we face.

With new 4×4s appearing every month, and the re-launch of the Landrover Freelander about to saturate our TV screens and city centre billboards, campaigns like ours are dwarfed by the reach of the global advertising industry. No matter how many interviews, phone-ins and newspaper headlines we get, we’ll never make the difference we need to without legislation to control this propaganda and bring the pollution taxes paid by owners of gas-guzzlers up to effective levels.

But the public backlash is real enough. Even the cabby taking me to Television Centre to talk about the story on the news was exasperated at the huge size of the latest models and the poor driving he sees every day from 4×4 drivers. With public awareness growing of the pollution, carbon dioxide emissions and danger to pedestrians from big 4×4s, there can’t be a Landcruiser or Cayenne driver in the country who hasn’t had their ear bent by a public-spirited friend over dinner. These factors do seem to be making the 4×4 unfashionable at last.

With luck this fall in sales will also - at least privately - be seen as significant by manufacturers for whom sales growth surely makes the difference between a winning product line and an ailing white elephant. Perhaps they will now start to make and promote nice, small, clean cars rather than behemoths we don’t need?

Don’t hold your breath. On the other hand, if you’re stuck behind one on your bike, hold it - hold it for as long as you can.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • NowPublic
  • Reddit

9 comments from readers


20 September 2006 at 14:01

Maybe if we banned these and other high emission vehicles from our roads parents might buy smaller cars and be less inclined to purchase ridiculous quantities of kit for their kids. Less consumption all round!


20 September 2006 at 14:20

You do not seem to realise that the government makes money out of “gas guzzlers” because they consume, comparatively, more fuel and produce duty for the treasury. What did you expect? Capitalism isn’t green.

I agree there should be a reduction in the number of 4×4s on our roads, and a tax band that incorporates this would be the most realistic option.

I feel, however, that a class division hinders the rationality surrounding this cause. Like fox hunting, this debate has been permeated by a dislike of the waelthier proportion of the population.

MF


20 September 2006 at 14:55

Sian,

Re: greenwash advertising on the blog

Can you do anything about the fact that the blog has adverts which are definately not green. When I first checked I got an ad for BP’s “carbon neutral” scheme. There’s also the usual cheap air flight ads on the site.

The BP scheme is ultimate greenwash. With 4 tonnes of CO2 being put into the atmosphere by the average UK car in 1 year, drivers can’t become “carbon neutral” so easily by paying £20 a year! The scheme actually adds up to a loyalty type scheme - where gullible, BP customers generate a few million pounds to help BP improve its image. BP would make a real difference by doing the offsetting itself – for example, by donating a significant proportion (eg 10%) of its £11.04bn 2005 profits to renewable energy projects in developing countries.

Best of luck at conference

Cllr Andrew Boswell,

Green Party group,

Norfolk County Council.

Read the One World Column … mainstreaming … Peace, Environment, Human Rights, Sustainability, Anti-war voices in the UK Eastern Region www.oneworldcolumn.org


20 September 2006 at 16:53

Hi Sian,

Good to see you blogging, look forward to seeing you as Principal Speaker….Caroline is, for people, in the know taking a year off this year.

I think blogging is a great way of spreading the green party message, yes capitalism to survive has to sell us more things, the resource and pollution dangers are obvious.

So we need an economy which is based on mutuals, coops, open source to put the profit motive in its place.

There used to be the slogan ‘Earth First, Profit last’.

Great 4 X 4 campaign and to people interested I would say come to Green Party conference starts tomorrow Hove Town Hall, they are always fun!

On to my 200th ish blog on http://another-green-world.blogspot.com/

greenladywell
20 September 2006 at 16:53

Hello fellow Green blogger!

See you at conference tomorrow!

Full council mtg tonight in Lewisham first though!

Best wishes

Sue

greenladywell
20 September 2006 at 16:55

D’oh! Meant to shamelessly plug my own blog too, like Derek!

http://greenladywell.blogspot.com


20 September 2006 at 16:55

Sian,

Looking forward to your blog!

It isn’t just the planet that suffers with traffic pollution, the EU estimates that 40,000 UK deaths each year are due to two pollutants, and the main source of these is traffic.

Having just started my own blog on the greening of health services I will add to the shameless plugs!

http://greenhealthservice.blogspot.com

Stuart


21 September 2006 at 16:56

Shortly after I started blogging about cyclo-commuting in London, I noticed your excellent SU4×4 site and petition and posted a link to it. http://www.theludicron.com/2006/02/chelsea-tractors.html

Riding a round trip of 12 miles to work places me in harm’s way on a daily basis and in my experience, it’s 4×4’s that are up there with the very worst drivers that London has to offer.

It’s also noticeable that when the kids are off school, the amount of 4×4’s drops considerably. But now they’re back, the morning ride is back to lines and lines of miserable mothers and fat kids sitting in silence. All the while slowly gas guzzling their way to school and back - in an agricultural vehicle(?!).

Presumably these people believe that their vehicle choice makes them a great parent for reasons of perceived safety (for whom?) and required space (hang on, aren’t there only ever 2 people in these trucks?!).

The notion that their choice of vehicle today is helping to make the planet one scary place for their kids to live in tomorrow has clearly escaped them. How’s that for safety? How’s that for being a responsible parent..?

Slapping various half-measure financial penalties on these clowns might seem to be the most realistic option but it doesn’t seem to be doing the trick. So why not simply remove 4×4’s from the choice available to the urban motorist?


26 September 2006 at 16:57

In response to what Andrew said, I see no problem with this as an ideologue and an anti-corporationist. Advertising is extremely short term and therefore one has to be pragmatic about it. Having thought about this issue with regard to other sites, I don’t see it a problem if advertisers of questionable morals (according to the ethics of the site’s authors and users) want to give money to a good site, and I definitely woudn’t feel guilty about it as long as it is absolutely clear that the links are just ads as opposed to endorsements.

If one were to feel guilty, the answer would be to make sure that one criticises the actions of the advertised companies that are seen as unethical on the site they are advertising on. There are many anti-widget sites on the Web that have advertising for widgets on them. In that case, most people clicking on the links won’t buy the widgets; if they do buy them, they definitely would have done so anyway as the site author’s tried their best to convice them otherwise, and one is getting the companies to find their own demise. It seems to me to be the best of all worlds. The companies probably won’t know either, and, if they do, they may desperately conclude that your readers are the people that they most want to go on to their site to counter your viewpoint (which one assumes is better than theirs); Microsoft is a classic example of a company doing that.

This is, of course, all hypothetical anyway, as I’m sure Sian has no input into who the advertisers are.

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

Sian Berry

Sian Berry lives in Kentish Town and was previously a principal speaker and campaigns co-ordinator for the Green Party. She was also their London mayoral candidate in 2008. She works as a writer and is a founder of the Alliance Against Urban 4x4s

Feeds

Recent Posts

Berry last blog

  • By Sian Berry
  • 14 July 2008

Oops we broke EU rules

  • By Sian Berry
  • 19 June 2008

Boris's large fiscal hole

  • By Sian Berry
  • 10 June 2008

Farewell Ken

  • By Sian Berry
  • 09 May 2008

I may not actually win...

  • By Sian Berry
  • 07 April 2008

The truth about Brian Paddick

  • By Sian Berry
  • 28 March 2008

Vote Berry... and Livingstone!

  • By Sian Berry
  • 19 March 2008