The Best Car Finance Blog In The World

Competition in the car market thanks to the increased presence of Chinese manufacturers could drive down the prices of battery electric vehicles (BEVs), according to Grant Thornton.

The Chinese new electric vehicle market has increased by 110% in the past year, while the broader passenger car market increased by 14%, figures from the China Association of Vehicle Manufacturers suggest.

BYD was the strongest-performing Chinese carmaker, selling 1.62 million BEV and hybrid models, an increase of 132% year-on-year.

Such strong BEV sales have driven up BYD’s market value, making it the world’s third-largest automotive company by value after Tesla and Toyota.

Chinese OEMs are set to target the European market to keep their growth trend going, says Philip Nothard, insight and strategy director at Cox Automotive.

“Chinese brands are pricing aggressively in their home market and clearly show more willingness to compete on price than the European and American incumbent OEMs such as BMW, Stellantis, Mercedes Benz, Ford, and Tesla,” he explained.

“Currently, retail prices for Chinese brands are not significantly lower than European and American OEMs. However, they are substantially better equipped with full infotainment and ADAS systems.

“In contrast, the European and American OEMs are falling short in providing this as standard equipment for their vehicles.”

In the latest edition of Cox Automotive’s quarterly digital automotive insight update, AutoFocus, Grant Thornton says that Europe is expected to experience an influx of Chinese brands over the next two years, with cut-price product offerings in the premium and mass market, aiming to gain market share quickly.

This, it argues, could push down BEV and internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle prices and put European OEMs’ margins under pressure.

Owen Edwards, head of downstream automotive at Grant Thornton UK, said: “During 2022, fewer than 2,000 Jeep vehicles (ICE vehicles) were sold in China, with only one Jeep sold in May 2022.

“This suggests Chinese brands are taking the pricing war not only to BEVs but also to ICE vehicles.

“With China’s advanced battery technology, sourcing of raw materials and more advanced BEV supply chain, Chinese OEMs can manufacture BEVs at €10,000 cheaper than European automakers, representing a significant cost advantage.”

It is unclear whether the EU will react to the influx of Chinese vehicles in the region by imposing further tariffs on imported vehicles to protect their domestic OEMs, says Grant Thornton.

It is clear, however, that Chinese carmakers must consider this possibility when deciding their long-term manufacturing strategies for Europe.

“At present, OEMs’ profitability has remained robust in the face of supply chain disruptions as vehicle shortages meant retail prices for vehicles have remained high, allowing OEMs’ margins in 2021 and early 2022 to hold up well,” continued Edwards.

“However, the rise in raw material prices and further disruptions in the supply chain caused by gas shortages in Europe have meant the profits of many OEMs have started to suffer.

“In 2023, OEMs are likely to stabilise their earnings against a backdrop of lower costs for some raw materials and a less volatile supply and distribution chain.

“As a result, production in US factories is increasing, and production utilisation is heading back to more normalised levels of 76%.”

Nothard says that the growing influence of Chinese brands adds another potential headwind for UK OEMs to counter in 2023.

“It’s also likely that the supply and demand for vehicles could be affected by any trade disruption caused by intensifying protectionism and sanctions,” he added.

“In addition, the UK’s Department of Transport is consulting on its Zero Emissions Vehicle policy. This could mandate automotive manufacturers to register a certain number of zero-emission cars and vans in the UK by 2024, in preparation for a 2030 ban on new pure petrol and diesel vehicles.”

Grant Thornton’s complete analysis can be found in Cox Automotive’s AutoFocus insight update.  By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

National Highways is “urgently investigating” a two-hour software failure which affected large parts of the smart motorway network on Wednesday (February 22).

The outage froze signs and signals, and deactivated the stopped vehicle detection system from 8.30-10.30am. 

The system is crucial to keeping drivers safe on smart motorways as it automatically detects a stopped vehicle. Without it, a vehicle would need to be detected by CCTV or National Highways patrols.

AA president Edmund King told the BBC that the failure meant drivers in vehicles that had broken down in live lanes were “sitting ducks”.

The fault occurred across the M5, M6, M62 and M60 as well as the M1 north of Northampton, but did not impact roads in the East and South East.

The software failure also meant that National Highways was unable to change signals in overhead gantries to close lanes with a red ‘X’ sign where a hazard had been detected.

National Highways blamed a software problem but added that it had not received any reports of incidents or injuries as a result.

Andrew Page-Dove, operational control director at National Highways, told the BBC that engineers had worked to repair the system “as soon as possible” and apologised for any inconvenience caused.

He said following the outage the agency had increased patrols and CCTV monitoring.

A similar outage lasting several hours occurred on October 26, last year.

Problems with the technology used on smart motorways to identify stopped vehicles in live lanes were flagged by the Office of Rail and Road (ORR) in a safety report, published in Decmeber.

The stopped vehicle detection system is a radar-based technology that is on every all lane running (ALR) smart motorway where the hard shoulder has been permanently converted to a live traffic lane.

The ORR report said that the performance of stopped vehicle detection was falling short of the performance requirements the company set itself.

In January, last year, the Department for Transport (DfT) halted the rollout of new, all-lane running smart motorway schemes until five years of safety data was available. By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

Three electric vehicle (EV) charge point operators (CPOs) have raised the cost of charging at peak times, due to high wholesale electricity costs.

GeniePoint, Ubitricity and Char.gy have all joined Tesla in deploying dynamic pricing across their public networks, offering drivers lower rates for charging at off-peak hours, and higher prices during times of peak demand.

Oliver Archer, lead analyst at Cornwall Insight, said: “Against the backdrop of rising commodity costs, charge point operators are trying to price in a way that supports the best use of their network, while still reflecting high input costs. Dynamic pricing may be a useful tool in this task, if done well. In many cases it will clearly be preferable to pushing up costs across the whole day.

“The challenge lies in setting a tariff that works for CPOs and drivers. Using the public network can already be complex and frustrating, and CPO’s need to ensure that dynamic pricing is seen as an opportunity by customers and not simply another inconvenience. This includes getting the tariff structure right and helping drivers to navigate a network of moving prices from multiple operators. The risk is that difficult decisions prompted by the energy crisis could push us towards dynamic pricing faster than we can help customers adjust to and take advantage of it.”

EV charger dynamic pricingThe price that EV drivers pay at the charger is comprised of several aspects including: the cost of electricity, the cost of installing infrastructure, the operation and maintenance of the charging network, as well as VAT at 20% for public charging.

Energy suppliers also add on non-commodity costs, their own running costs and margin on top of wholesale electricity.

While the CPOs have been motivated to implement dynamic pricing for similar reasons, the structures of their tariffs are varied, with differences between when peak prices occur and what are off-peak and peak rates. Ubitricity has also introduced an element of smart charging, with drivers able to delay charging until after the peak period ends.

Cornwall Insight says the optimum dynamic pricing structure will depend on the contracts between CPOs and energy suppliers, expected demand throughout the day, and the willingness of customers to adjust behaviour around the price. What works in one case may be less appropriate in another, depending on where the chargers are located.

The cost of charging an electric vehicle (EV) at home, on a standard variable tariff, has increased by around 20% this winter. By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

Drivers of electric vehicles (EVs) can boost their battery range by up to 10% when using EV-specific tyres, says Michelin.

However, research conducted by the tyre manufacturer showed that most drivers are unaware that EV-specific tyres are available, with three-quarters (72%) of drivers in the dark.

John Howe, managing director for UK and Ireland at Michelin, says that EV-specific tyres “can enhance battery range, allowing drivers to travel further per charge”, but also “last longer on an electric car than a standard tyre”.

Further research also revealed that the increase to battery range is viewed by respondents as the main benefit of EV-specific tyres (35% of drivers), with the second most important benefit proving to be that EV-specific tyres last longer on an EV than a standard tyre (one in five respondents).

Howe continued: “A great deal of innovation and research goes into producing a tyre that can increase the range of an electric car.

“It requires the incorporation of several new tyre technologies to lower rolling resistance, increase efficiency and optimise the handling characteristics of electric cars.

“However, to truly get the most out of an EV, drivers should ensure they are making use of every opportunity available to them. To this end, we have provided our expert-recommended Top Tips for increasing EV battery range.”

MICHELIN’S TOP TIPS FOR INCREASED EV RANGE

1. DRIVE MORE SLOWLY AND SMOOTHLY

Electric cars are notoriously faster off the line than their petrol or diesel equivalents, but it is wise to limit full throttle accelerations to not only stay safe on winter roads, but also to extend your EV’s range. Where possible, keep your speed under 60 mph; as speeds increase, drag and rolling resistance increases too. Utilise your car’s “Eco” mode, if it has one.

2. USE EV-SPECIFIC TYRES

Electric cars can perform with a suitable standard tyre – they don’t have to be EV-specific tyres. However, if you are keen to maximise range, reduce noise levels or embrace the full performance of your car, EV-specific tyres can allow you to travel further on a full charge. Whichever tyres you choose, make sure they are inflated according to the manufacturer’s guidance, as improperly inflated tyres can reduce range, accelerate wear and pose a safety risk.

3. MAKE THE MOST OF REGENERATIVE BRAKING

Use your EV’s regenerative braking function as you come to a stop to harness the energy generated as the car slows down. By using the brake pedal less and using regenerative braking instead, you can extend the range of your car.

4. ONLY USE THE HEATER WHEN YOU NEED IT

The heating system can drain your EV’s battery – switch it off if you don’t need it. Some EVs allow the driver to pre-heat the car while it’s plugged in, but even this can consume energy before your journey has begun, so be mindful of this when aiming for the maximum range from your EV in winter.

5. TRAVEL LIGHT AND REMOVE THE ROOF RACK

Reducing a vehicle’s weight will improve efficiency and therefore range. So, remove any unnecessary items from the back seats or the boot, especially if they are weighty. Roof racks and other accessories will cause additional aerodynamic drag which will reduce your EV’s range, especially at high speeds when drag increases significantly.

6. CHECK THE LABELS ON YOUR TYRES

On new tyres, the EU Labelling can indicate the specific qualities that a tyre possesses. For example, choosing a tyre rated A or B for rolling resistance will help you to maximise the range of your EV.

By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

A quarter (25%) of electric vehicle owners also own or regularly drive a car with an internal combustion engine (ICE), according to Zap Map.

It’s annual EV Charging Survey revealed that among those drivers who also have a petrol or diesel vehicle, electric is chosen for the vast majority of journeys.

The type of journey electric is most likely to be favoured for is a local daily trip such as going shopping, the school run or eating out, for which 85% of the time dual fuel drivers will take the EV.

For commutes, 71% these drivers use their EV, and even for journeys of over 100 miles 67% will stick with electric. Even for UK based holidays, likely to involve long cross-country journeys reliant on the public charging network, a majority of 55% will leave the fossil fuel car at home.

Melanie Shufflebotham, COO & co-founder of Zap-Map, said: “Our survey has shown for several years now that once you go electric, you don’t go back. This year we’ve gone further to show that drivers who haven’t quite let their conventional car go yet still choose to drive their electric. Even for those long cross-country journeys where a charge stop is likely to be necessary.

“It’s an endorsement for EVs that even when the option is open to take the fossil fuel car, drivers are very happy to stick with electric.”

The Zap-Map survey showed that 49% of EV owners drive just one full battery-electric vehicle, 8% two or more and 2% own or regularly use one battery electric and one plug-in hybrid electric vehicle. By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

A £110 million scrappage scheme has been launched ahead of the expansion of London’s ultra-low emission zone (ULEZ).

The fund is accessible to low-income and disabled Londoners, but the vast majority of fleets will miss out.

Transport for London (TfL) says that the scrappage scheme is open to charities, sole traders and business with 10 or fewer employees registered in London.

They can apply for a £5,000 grant to scrap a van or £7,000 for a minibus, with a £5,000 grant also available to retrofit certain vans or minibuses.

Grants to scrap and replace a van or minibus with a fully electric vehicle (EV) are set at £7,500 and £9,500 respectively. 

In launching the ULEZ scrappage scheme, TfL has also hiked the penalty charge notice (PCN) from January 30 for non-compliant vehicles entering the zone from £160 to £190 (reduced to £90 if paid within 14 days).

TfL says that the increase will “maintain the deterrent effect” of London’s ULEZ and “achieve the scheme’s air quality and health objectives”.

The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, said: “We need to get the most highly polluting vehicles off our roads, which are damaging the health of all Londoners, including drivers.

“The rising cost of living has been a key consideration for me, which is why we are launching this new and improved scrappage scheme – the biggest ever – to help low-income and disabled Londoners, businesses, sole traders and charities switch to cleaner vehicles, or support them to make the most of other transport options.”

Khan announced last year that the existing ULEZ would be expanded to operate across all London boroughs, up to the current Low Emission Zone (LEZ) boundary, from August 29.

The expanded ULEZ will continue to operate 24 hours a day, every day of the year (except Christmas Day).

To comply with the ULEZ, petrol cars and vans must be Euro 4 and diesel cars and vans must be Euro 6. Motorcycles and mopeds must be Euro 3 to comply.

Vehicles that do not meet the standards must pay the £12.50 daily charge.

Alex Williams, TfL’s chief customer and strategy officer, said: “Londoners are already choosing public transport, walking and cycling for the majority of trips and the Mayor’s new scrappage scheme will support more people to get rid of their highly polluting vehicles and make the switch to greener travel.

“These grants will play a significant role in ensuring smaller businesses, those on low incomes, disabled people and charities are fully prepared ahead of the expanded zone coming in later this year.”

In addition to the scrappage grants, Williams says that TfL is offering options for annual bus and tram passes as well as teaming up with other organisations to provide incentives that make it easier to travel more sustainably.

“This includes exciting offers from our partners, such as bike hire subscriptions, e-scooter discounts and car club deals,” added Williams.

“We would encourage drivers to take advantage of these fantastic ways to get around for less.” 

However, Sue Robinson, chief executive of the National Franchised Dealers Association (NFDA), which represents car and commercial retailers across the UK, doubts how effective the scrappage scheme will be.

“Whilst the NFDA supports and is encouraged by the London Mayor’s decision to provide a financial incentive towards exchanging ageing and non-compliant vehicles for newer, greener modes of transport, we are severely concerned that this will not be enough and the scheme will continue to have negative implications for a large proportion of motorists,” she said.

“The total budget allocated for the scrappage scheme will not be sufficient to make an impact the level at which the Mayor is expecting.”

“By increasing the ultra-low emission zone to the entirety of London, it is forcing the residents of London to make a decision before they are ready.

She continued: “During a period of unprecedented financial struggle and in the midst of a cost of living crisis, families of low income may not be ready to make a transition to a newer vehicle even with the scrappage scheme.

“NFDA remains firmly against the decision to extend the ULEZ, or at least the timescale of enforcement is far too soon.

“Without the availability of government incentives and the commitment for more investment towards EV infrastructure to adequately prepare London for a complete transfer to EV adoption, this restriction to older ICE and diesel vehicles should not be implemented.”

To learn more about the scrappage scheme, visit the TfL website.  By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

Drivers should be responsible for ensuring all their passengers wear seatbelts and face larger fines for not buckling up, according to a new study by the RAC.

Research that coincides with the 40th anniversary of the UK’s seatbelt law found that more than two-thirds of motorists (68%) believe drivers should be penalised if their passengers aren’t wearing a seatbelt.

The study also found that a quarter of motorists (24%) believe the current law – where a driver can be fined up to £500 for not buckling up – is too lenient, with a clear majority of these (69%) thinking that those who break the law should pay both a fine and receive at least three points on their licences.

Simon Williams, RAC road safety spokesman,  said: “Forty years on from the introduction of what is undeniably one the most important road safety laws, it’s still the case that far too many people don’t wear seatbelts – something that’s a factor in around 30% of all road deaths each year. It’s also sadly the case that people are twice as likely to die in a crash if they’re not wearing one.

“The statistics are stark, yet some people are still prepared to take the risk and not wear a seatbelt. This obviously begs the question what can be done next. Today’s anniversary, perhaps, provides the ideal moment for the Government to show it’s serious about improving safety on our roads and put an action plan in place for getting more of us to buckle up in the first place.”

Four per cent of drivers – the equivalent of around 1.7m full driving licence holders in Great Britain – admit to driving without a seatbelt over the last 12 months, with around a fifth of these (22%) saying they don’t belt up at least half the time. In contrast, 7% of respondents admitted to not wearing a seatbelt when travelling as passengers in other vehicles. Drivers only have responsibility to make sure they and any children in their vehicles are buckled up properly.

Williams added: “Our research shows drivers are clearly supportive of greater penalties, which we know the Government is considering. But arguably, toughening the law isn’t enough: drivers need to think there’s a good chance of being caught in the first place. If they don’t, there’s every chance they’ll carry on as normal – just as we see day-in, day-out with plenty of drivers still prepared to illegally use a handheld phone while behind the wheel.”

Seatbelt laws are at risk of being lost or watered down, accroding to RoSPA. The road safety organisation said that while seatbelt usage features in the Road Safety Act, the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill 2022 is set to make critical information on who, where and when people should wear seatbelts unclear.

Nathan Davies, head of policy at RoSPA, said: “Wearing a seatbelt is not just ‘common sense’. Making seatbelts a legal requirement changed behaviour, and drove up usage by 55 per cent almost immediately.

But recent Department for Transport data shows us that compliance is the lowest it has ever been since the law was introduced, and that means that people still need laws which reinforce the importance for them and the other occupants of vehicles. By removing seatbelt laws, we expect usage to fall, and fatalities will then inevitably increase.

“Throwing vital seatbelt laws in the air at a time they are most needed will set the stage for thousands of the public being killed and injured on the road, leaving behind loved ones, friends and family. We must not throw away the progress made over last 40 years of mandatory seatbelt usage and urge the Government to tackle these vital laws with the time, respect and attention they deserve.” By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

Emergency services have joined forces with National Highways to remind drivers not to ignore the red X sign after one council revealed it had prosecuted almost 10,000 drivers.

The red X is used to close lanes when an obstruction such as a broken-down vehicle is detected in the road ahead.

Abiding by the signal is vital to avoid a potentially serious collision.

Chief Constable Jo Shiner, the National Police Chiefs’ Council lead for Roads Policing, said: “Red X signals are in place on the motorway for your safety and the safety of others.

“Sadly, there are too many instances where motorists fail to comply with a red X signal and put others in incredible danger by driving in a closed lane. This is unacceptable and drivers who do so need to understand they face prosecution.”

In June 2019, there was a change in legislation which meant cameras can automatically detect vehicles that ignore a red X and as of September last year all police forces have been able to enforce the cameras.

The cameras can be used to automatically detect vehicles passing illegally under a red X or entering the lane beyond a red X, which can result in a fixed penalty of up to £100 and three points or, in some cases, more severe penalties or a court appearance.

The majority of drivers – more than 90% – comply with the red X, although thousands have been prosecuted for not doing so, according to National Highways.

Surrey Police was one of the first forces to begin enforcing camera detected red X offences in November 2019.

Since then, there have been 9,427 first Notices of Intended Prosecution sent out by the force.

Of these, over half – 4,926 – have so far completed a safety awareness course, while others selected alternative disposal options such as paying a fixed penalty or having the matter heard at court.

RAC road safety spokesman Simon Williams said: “This is a very worrying statistic. For some time we’ve been concerned that red Xs displayed on signs at the side of the road aren’t nearly as clear as those positioned on gantries directly above each lane.

“We fear this may be a factor in some of the non-compliance. For this reason, it would be helpful to know drivers’ reasons for not obeying red Xs.

“If it’s the case drivers say they hadn’t seen or understood signs at the side of the road then there may be an argument for installing more expensive gantry signage.

“It’s critical drivers obey the red X as it’s often the first line of defence for anyone stranded in a live lane of smart motorway traffic.”

Association of Ambulance Chief Executives (AACE) managing director, Martin Flaherty, says it is important to remember that 999 ambulances on blue lights may be trying to reach critically ill patients on motorway lanes where red X signals are in force, for example, after a serious road traffic collision.

“If those lanes are blocked by drivers who should not be there, ambulance crews could be delayed in reaching patients who urgently need our life saving skills,” he added.

“We want drivers to understand that a lane closed by a red X is for the safety of all – and especially to help protect the scene of an accident and those emergency and essential services who may be on the carriageway to deal with the aftermath.” 

The message was the same from Dan Quin, road lead for transportation at the National Fire Chiefs Council.

He explained: “When used in the event of emergencies, they provide invaluable access to the scene of an incident, preventing time lost in negotiating the build-up of traffic.

“Red X signals also provide safety for workers while on the road, including emergency services and the public, by reducing the risk of further collisions.

“Ignoring red X signals is dangerous, it is an offence, and all road users have a role to play in complying with them.”

It has been an offence for more than two decades to drive in a lane closed by a red X.

National Highways traffic officer, Dave Harford, said: “We don’t take the decision to close lanes lightly, but when we do, drivers must obey the closure.

“A red X signal is there for the safety of everyone on the road – including people in difficulty, traffic officers, recovery and emergency services helping them, and all other road users besides.

“Thankfully, the vast majority of drivers do comply with the signals but those who don’t put themselves and others at risk.”

National Highways says that if your vehicle has a problem, or you get into trouble on a motorway, stay calm and try to exit at the next junction or motorway service area.

If that’s not possible, put your left indicators on, move into the left lane, enter the next emergency area, or hard shoulder, put your hazard lights on, get behind a safety barrier where there is one and keep well away from moving traffic.

Drivers should also call National Highways on 0300 123 5000 then a breakdown provider for help.

If you are unable to exit your vehicle and get to a safe place, have stopped in a live traffic lane or feel your life is in danger, National Highways says that you should stay in your vehicle with your seatbelts and hazard lights on and call 999 immediately or press the SOS button in your car.

Antony Kildare, CEO IAM RoadSmart, says it is “quite simple”.

“A red X means trouble ahead and has exactly the same legal force as a red traffic light.

“With new technology the police can take action and you can be fined and have points placed on your licence. It’s just not worth the risk to gain a few places in the queue.” By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

The way the advisory electricity rate (AER) is calculated has been changed in order to better reflect prices when it is reviewed quarterly, HMRC has confirmed.

Previously, the rate used by many companies to reimburse electric company car drivers for business mileage had been based solely on an annual figure published by the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS), and the electrical energy consumption values for each car model, provided by the Department for Transport (DfT).

HMRC will continue to use the BEIS and DfT data but will now incorporate figures published in the Office for National Statistics (ONS) quarterly index for domestic electricity, a figure which formed part of the Consumer Price Index, when it reviews the AER quarterly.

An HMRC spokesperson told Fleet News: “Using this methodology provides a more up to date guide for employers and employees to calculate what tax needs to be paid for electric car usage.

“HMRC keeps the AER rate under regular review and will be publishing further details on how it calculates the AER rate in due course.”

HMRC announced in November that the AER would increase from 5ppm to 8ppm from December 1, and the reimbursement rate would also be reviewed quarterly in line with advisory fuel rates (AFRs).

In 2017, the average cost of standard electricity in the UK was 14.4p per kWh and was used to calculate the first AER, which was introduced in September 2018.

The average per kWh price for electricity was 34p at the end of last year.

Just one in eight drivers (12.2%) thinks that the current 5ppm reimbursement rate reflects the true cost of charging an EV, according to a Fleet News poll.

Almost three-quarters (73.5%) of respondents believe it should be 10ppm or more, while one in five (20.2%) say it should be three times the current rate, with drivers receiving 15ppm to cover their charging costs. By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News

The Government is proposing reform of drug-driving laws to bring them in line with drink-driving legislation.

New plans, unveiled by the Department for Transport (DfT) recommend drug-drivers be required to undertake rehabilitation courses before being allowed back behind the wheel.

Drink-drive related deaths have fallen 88% between 1979 and 2015. However, there has been an increase in drug-related driving offences, with more than 12,000 convicted in 2019 and 44% committed by re-offenders. 

Currently, those convicted of drug-driving are handed a driving ban, prison sentence or fine by the courts, but are not required to complete rehabilitation courses before resuming driving – unlike drink-drivers.

In a call for evidence, Government is asking whether drug-drivers should likewise have to undergo rehabilitation, helping better protect the public.

Transport secretary Grant Shapps said: “Drink-driving is now rightly seen as a social taboo by most of us in this country and we have worked hard to drive down drink-drive related deaths.

“But if we are to make our roads safer still, there is no room to be lax on drug-driving, which is why I have launched this call for evidence today.

“It’s only right that drug-drivers must undergo rehabilitation before getting back behind the wheel, helping protect the public from this hidden problem and stamping out drug-driving for good.”

Non-attendees to drink-driving rehabilitation courses are over twice as likely to commit a new drink-driving offence within three years, so by offering high-risk drug-driving offenders the same support, Government hopes to bring down the number of repeat offenders.

RAC head of roads policy, Nicholas Lyes, said: “We welcome proposals to offer drug-driving offenders rehabilitation courses, in the same way those caught drink-driving are offered them, because the evidence shows this helps to reduce reoffending and improves road safety.”

DfT statistics show that 713 people were seriously injured in drug-driving collisions in 2020, up from 499 in 2016, and some police forces are arresting more drug-drivers than drink-drivers.

The call for evidence launched today will also ask whether we should bring the way specimens are taken in line with current medical practice by using vacuum blood extraction, decreasing the risk of blood borne viruses to healthcare professionals.

It will also seek views on the relationship between medicinal cannabis and road safety, in another move to ensure road safety policy keeps up to date with changing societal norms.

This is the first of several steps Government is taking this year to reduce the problem of drink and drug driving. Later this year, Government will seek views on other drink and drug driving matters, such as failing to stop after a collision and the criminal use of vehicles. 

Jack Cousens, head of roads policy for the AA, said: “The AA welcomes this announcement in an effort to make our roads safer while offering help to those who want to stop taking drugs.

“Drug driving court cases have risen from just under 1,500 in 2015 to 13,700 in 2020, which shows a growing problem that police forces are rightly seeking to stop. Likewise, we are encouraged that more drivers are being tested, to deter people from driving under the influence of drugs.”  By Graham Hill thanks to Fleet News