Written evidence submitted by Pupils 2 Parliament (EVP0059)

SUMMARY

1. Evidence is submitted from consultation with 78 primary school pupils across four different schools.

2. Overall, the children were positive about the idea of having an electric car or van in place of a petrol or diesel one.  Twice as many would want an electric one than a petrol or diesel one.  Children were most attracted to electric vehicles by their lack of pollution.  A further benefit was the likelihood of lower running costs.

3. Children saw the main negative about electric vehicles as problems with charging – low range between charges, and not enough convenient charging points to rely on along a journey.  A second negative was their quietness being a risk to pedestrians unable to hear them coming. 

4. Although having zero tailpipe emissions, children were concerned that making electric cars and their batteries, and generating electricity for them, may all be  polluting and use a lot of resources.

5. The children told us that to encourage people to buy electric cars, there must be enough charging points across the country – including providing a charging point at all present petrol and diesel garages.  They also suggested advertising their benefits of electric cars for the environment and for their owners, together with financial incentives.  Advertising could include a “persuasive letter” to drivers from the government.  Other suggestions were developing better batteries, giving electric car owners discounts on their usual electricity bills, and making all electric vehicles make a sound for safety.

6. The children voted – but only just – in favour of speeding up the switch from petrol and diesel to electric power for all new cars and vans.  They thought the key was provision of enough charging points, and suggested piloting in one county or city area.

7. Children overall did not support replacing the existing car tax with road pricing.  They acknowledged that there were benefits for safety, reducing pollution and

encouraging active travel for short journeys.  But they saw these as outweighed by unfairness to drivers who have to drive long distances to work or for family reasons, and by the introduction of car-tracking.  They also saw risks from road pricing;  it might shift traffic from busy main roads onto minor ones which would become congested, and that a system of driving now and paying later might lead to people running up debts.  There was also the possibility that far from switching completely from car tax to a pay-as-you-drive tax, a basic car tax might end up being kept and road pricing added on top for using busy main roads and motorways.  Drivers could end up paying more tax overall.

8. If there is to be road pricing, their preference would be for a scheme charging the same rate per mile however far is travelled, rather than one allowing the first three or four thousand miles free and then having a bigger charge for each mile after that.  Their top two priorities for spending any tax raised by road pricing were on fighting climate change, and on making roads better and safer.

9. If tracking is to be introduced with a road pricing scheme, the children’s view was that it didn’t matter which organisation does the tracking, as long as they do the job properly and maintain privacy.  Considering organisations that had been suggested in government documents, the preference was for the tracking to be done by the government or an organisation set up specially for the job.

10. Children were strongly against cars being tracked as part of a road pricing scheme.  Their opposition to this counted against having road pricing, and there was even a reference to being against switching to electric cars at all if that leads to road pricing which includes tracking.

INTRODUCTION

11. Pupils 2 Parliament is an established project gathering school pupils’ views for submission to Parliamentary Select Committee inquiries, and to government and national body consultations.  Pupils’ views are collected and faithfully reported independently, neutrally and without bias.  We have permission from the Clerks of both Houses of Parliament to use the term ‘Parliament’ in the title.

12. This submission gives the views of 78 school pupils, aged from 9 to 11, from four primary schools: Colley Lane Primary Academy, Halesowen;  St George’s CE academy, Clun; Gig Mill primary school, Stourbridge; and Stokesay primary school, Craven Arms.

13. We have gathered and submitted children’s views on this topic as they are already road users as both cyclists and passengers in vehicles, and their responses can inform the Committee of the current views of vehicle owners and drivers of the future.  We suspect that this may be one of very few, or even the only, submission the Committee receives to this call for evidence from the future driving generation.

14. Under Covid restrictions, we surveyed pupils online, and they sent their responses individually and directly to Pupils 2 Parliament.  Seven younger children were helped by their parent or carer to operate the computer and type in their answers.  To keep the children’s views separate from the adults’, the adults were asked to give their own answers separately from their child’s.

15. As part of the online survey, we gave the children unbiased explanations of the issues behind the questions, based on information in the relevant House of Commons briefing paper.

16. This submission, including quotations from pupils, may be freely quoted in relation to the inquiry.

Shifting to ‘zero emission’ vehicles

17. We asked the 78 children about their experience of electric cars or vans.  Only five children (6%) were in families that actually owned an electric car or van.  Another one in five of the children had ridden in one, and almost another half the children had either sat in, or at least definitely seen, an electric vehicle, but had not ridden in one.  A quarter of the children had, as far as they knew, never spotted an electric car or van.

18. The children were however positive about electric vehicles.  We asked whether, if their family needed to get a car or van, they would want it to be an all-electric one.  36 of the children would want a future car or van to be an electric one, against 18 who wouldn’t – putting that a different way, twice as many children would want their family to have an electric vehicle.  Many though (24 of the children) were ‘in the middle’ about whether a future car or van for their family should be all-electric.

19. Then we asked the children what they thought would be the good, and the bad, things about having an electric car or van.  We made no suggestions, so their answers were entirely their own.

Good things about electric vehicles

20. The top good thing, by far, about electric cars and vans was that they do not pollute and so are environmentally friendly.  41 of the children (a majority) spontaneously listed this as a good thing.  Using an electric vehicle is “driving without polluting”. 

21. Second, a long way behind from 8 children, came saving money on running costs (including taxes).

22. Other good things listed by the children included electric vehicles being quiet (and so “a lot more peaceful on the road”), not having to wait at petrol stations, and electric vehicles being more efficient.  Changing to an electric vehicle would be “reducing your carbon footprint”. 

23. Some found the idea of an all-electric vehicle attractive in itself (3 children described the idea as “cool”).  One saw electric vans as much better than petrol or diesel ones for doing local deliveries.

24. Some children saw it as a good thing that electric vehicles are now able to do things that they probably couldn’t until recently – such as going fast, visiting more places in one journey, and going a long distance.  As one pupil put it, nowadays, an electric car is “probably a good car”.

25. Some also wrote about how changing to electric vehicles may not be the whole answer to pollution or climate change – but it is a start we can definitely make.  One pupil wrote;  “it wouldn’t pollute the air and it would be appropriate to use since it would help to save the planet.  We need to take small steps and I think this is where we should start”.

26. Here are two children’s analyses:

“if we had an electric car or van it would be really good because we would be helping to stop pollution and we would help to save the planet, although it is still bad having a car I think it is better to have a mode of transport that can save the planet rather than destroy it”

“this world is the only source of life that we know, even if we find another world/planet we would be destroying this one.  Lives will be lost and there will be nowhere safe if we keep using petrol or diesel, even though they are a good source, we are still killing.  That’s why I think we should have electric cars – but not flying cars”.

Bad things about electric vehicles

27. Pupils spontaneously came up with a wider range of bad things about electric cars and vans.  There was no single main bad thing that came way above all the others.

28. The top of their list of bad things was problems with charging.  This included not having enough charging points, needing more charging points away from home if you lived somewhere like a flat so couldn’t charge the vehicle at home, charging taking a long time, and charging needing to be done quite often.  Some thought people may well forget to put their car or van on charge once they have finished a journey.

29. Some saw electric vehicles as needing charging more often than petrol or diesel vehicles need refuelling; you have to “keep plugging it in”,  “you have to

charge it more than you would have to put petrol or diesel in a non-electric car”.

30. Some were particularly worried about electric vehicles having a short range before they need recharging, and this, coupled with the lack of enough charging points, meant that there is a real risk of the car or van running out of power and stopping in the middle of a journey.  As some put this;  “if your car runs out of battery and you can’t find somewhere to charge it up”,  “I don’t think you can travel very far before you have to charge it”,  “you would have to make sure the route you’re taking has a recharge station”.

31. These worries about electric cars and vans having a short range before needing charging, and there not being enough charging points, had also come up in an earlier Pupils 2 Parliament report, submitted to a Department of Transport consultation (Banning new cars with petrol or diesel engines, Pupils 2 Parliament, 2020).  In that consultation we had asked children whether they would be more worried about a petrol or diesel car running out of fuel and stopping, or an electric car running out of battery charge and stopping.  The majority of those children were equally worried about both – the worry is about any car running out of what powers it and so stopping. 

32. The difference for electric cars, in both that earlier consultation and this one, is that running out of battery power in an electric car is more worrying, because there are not enough charging points around, whereas there are enough garages selling petrol and diesel around.

33. Second on the list of bad things about electric vehicles was that they are so quiet.  Because of this they may be dangerous to pedestrians (including themselves as children) who cannot hear them coming.  “Maybe walkers especially walkers coming home from school could not hear the car and possibly get run over”;  “it is easy to get run over”;  “animals and humans would not be able to hear the cars so there would be more road accidents”.

34. The third bad thing on the children’s list was that although they have “zero tailpipe emissions”, electric vehicles are still responsible for pollution.  They produce pollution when they are made, and when the electricity they use is generated.  “Making them will pollute the air we breathe.”

35. Making their batteries currently uses lithium, which is a scarce resource, and charging their batteries will put the electricity system under a strain and mean more power stations need to be built.  All of this can harm the environment.  And electricity could even become more expensive.

36. The fourth bad thing on the children’s list was the view that electric vehicles themselves will prove more expensive than cars and vans now.  They will be especially expensive to buy.  Having to build enough electric vehicles in a short period of time as “replacement cars” for new petrol or diesel ones will take a lot of resources and could be costly.

37. Some children did think electric cars and vans are less safe than the usual sort, and that they are still not able to go very fast.  There were also some worries about them catching fire, and a worry about spilling a drink inside an electric vehicle being dangerous so close to electricity and a powerful battery.

38. Just as some children liked the idea of electric vehicles, some others just preferred the current sort of petrol or diesel vehicles.  One said “I like the growl of a petrol or diesel powered engine”, a second said “I like to hear the different sounds of cars”, and a third told us “I am not a big fan of electric cars or vans and I like the original cars”.

39. A final negative about electric vehicles was that the government will lose out on road taxes drivers pay at the moment.  This is of course one of the reasons for the government’s proposal for road pricing as a replacement way to tax driving.  The government might also need to put taxes up on buying and driving electric vehicles once there are no new petrol or diesel ones, and drivers could end up paying more road taxes than they do now.

40. As some of the children put this;  “the government wouldn’t get the tax pay that you usually pay for when buying either petrol or diesel which means that they wouldn’t be able to buy stuff for us”,  “the government would get less money and they will not be able to afford the benefits for us”,  “they cost more money all around as they take a lot of electricity and people will be taxed more than ever”.

41. One child though thought that changing to electric vehicles was well worth any loss of tax;  “the government will have less funding due to us not having to pay money for our car on the road, but I feel that is a loss we will have to take if we want zero emissions by 2050”.

42. Another summed so much up in their answer to our question on the bad things about electric cars and vans;  “nothing except looking for an electric station thing”.

Encouraging people to get electric vehicles

43. We asked the children how they thought people could be encouraged to change from petrol, diesel and hybrid vehicles, to all-electric cars and vans.  Their views came as always without any suggestions from us.

44. Firstly, children thought the best way to encourage people to buy electric cars is to respond to the view that you have to charge an electric vehicle more often than you would have to fill up with petrol or diesel in a non-electric one.

45. Secondly came being able to reassure people that it will be just as easy to find somewhere to charge your electric vehicle as it is now to find a garage to refuel a petrol or diesel one.  As children had said, this could be done by putting electric charging places in all petrol/diesel stations.  At first these would be in addition to petrol and diesel pumps, but eventually they could replace petrol and diesel pumps.

46. The key is “more charging stations”.  One pupil warned; “place loads (of electric charging stations) around , otherwise it’s back to diesel and petrol cars”.

47. Here, in no particular order, are all the other suggestions from the children:

Tell people that switching to electric vehicles is important to saving ourselves, animals and the planet from the effects of pollution

Spread the message that if you switch to an electric car “you’ll have a longer life, the ecosystem will stand strong, and you can eat blackberries by the roadside”

And tell people to switch to an electric vehicle because  “the environment is in need”

Give more evidence of the benefits of electric cars – and make sure that they really are cheaper to run so you can say they save you money

Also spread the message that “electric cars go so fast it’s unbelievable and they’re so fun and comfortable to drive in”

Make it cheaper to install an electric vehicle charging point

For the UK to take the first step to set an example to other countries to do the same

Radio and TV broadcasting “expressing the good things about electric cars and the bad things about diesel or petrol cars”

Posters in car sales areas with the message about electric cars “Better value.  Better for the planet”

Making electric cars cheaper and petrol/diesel ones more expensive

The government advertising in newspapers and on social media that it will pay a percentage of the cost of an electric car or van

The government sending out a “persuasive letter” promising drivers that the government will pay a percentage of the cost of an electric vehicle

Offer a discount on your usual electricity bills if you have an electric vehicle

Make sure that electric cars include the latest electronic technology, like automatic gear change (“if you are not fabulous with gear sticks this could be your winner”), automatic windows, and hands free communications

“Making bigger batteries and making it cheaper to charge them”

“Make it so they have a noise so you can hear them coming”

And lastly, make electric cars especially attractive-looking – “making them look good” and perhaps “make the cars shiny”.

Speeding up the change to electric vehicles

48. We asked for the children’s views on this policy.  We explained that the government is sure there will be enough places to charge electric cars and vans in time.  We gave the children a vote on the government’s proposal to speed up the change-over from petrol and diesel cars and vans, to all-electric ones.

49. There was a lot of uncertainty about this.  A third of the children said they were ‘in the middle on this’, and so abstained from voting for or against the policy of speeding up the change.

50. The others voted – just – in favour of bringing the ban on selling new petrol or diesel cars and vans forward to an earlier date, by 27 votes to 23.

51. These two quotations from children give reasons for voting in favour of speeding up the changeover;  “speed it up as the global warming is getting really bad”,  “if it will help lower pollution the government should try to do everything they can to succeed into swapping diesel and petrol cars to electric ones as soon as possible”.  Another even wrote;  “as much as my family dislike the government, this is the one thing we all agree on”.

52. One of those who voted against speeding up the ban wrote about their dilemma on the question;  “I voted NO because if they speed it up and make a mistake then there would be no time to fix it, but if they spread it out and make a mistake then there WILL be time to fix it.  But I could have chosen YES because by then the ice caps could already have melted”.

53. Without giving them any suggestions, we asked the children for any further views on this policy.  One view was that getting enough charging points for a complete changeover for new cars should be tried in some places first,

rather than the whole country at once;  “it would make sense to start building places to charge the electric cars in ONE county first, like Worcester or Sheffield, and then switch the petrol and diesel cars there to electric cars so it is small steps and seeing how it works out from there”.

54. Another view was that it may simply not be possible to build charging points fast enough to speed up the changeover;  “there are not many close to us so I think it will take more than 9 years for that to happen but I’m sure that eventually it will”.

55. Again the suggestion came that to meet the demand for enough charging points, “at petrol stations we should have places for electric cars”.

Public support for road pricing

56. The idea of road pricing – instead of car tax, drivers paying to use the roads they use - was new to the children.  Their views on this are therefore their own fresh thinking and reactions to the concept, without being led by adults.  We gave them no lead towards or against the idea.

57. To capture this fresh thinking, we asked the children to say which of two options they thought was the fairest way for drivers to pay tax for driving on public roads.  The choices were ‘everybody paying the same road tax and after

that being allowed to drive on almost all roads’, and ‘nobody having to pay any road tax, but instead people paying a ‘toll’ to use main roads or very busy roads’.

58. The children voted strongly for the present system of drivers paying the same road tax, however far they drive, and whichever roads they drive on.  With no adult lead, the children’s response to the idea of road pricing was negative.

59. The majority for the present road tax system rather than its replacement by road pricing was 46 children out of 71 voting (65%).  12 children (17%) voted for road pricing.  The other 13 children said that they were ‘in the middle’ between the two options.

60. We followed this up with a separate straight vote for or against road pricing on its own.  Out of 69 who answered the question, the children voted against road pricing by 32 votes to 22, with 15 abstentions.  That makes a final vote of 46% against, 32% in favour, and 22% abstaining.

61. Nevertheless, we also asked the children to tell us which of the government list of possible benefits of road pricing they thought would be the most important benefits if they could be achieved.

62. In first place, as the most important, came having less pollution in the air from busy roads in towns and cities.  Second most important was people probably not using their cars so much for short journeys.  Two other benefits shared third place in the children’s rankings – these were having fewer traffic jams on busy roads, and people being able to save on the tax they have to pay by driving less.

63. Ranked in last place was drivers not all having to pay the same full amount of road tax.

64. We gave the children the opportunity to give their final views about road pricing.

65. One view against a road pricing scheme were a belief in the right and freedom to drive on any roads;  “you should have the right to drive on any road without paying”,  “the roads still should be open to everyone and people shouldn’t have to pay”.

66. There was the view that road pricing would be unfair to people who have to drive long distances, for example to get to and from work, or to pick up and drop off their children where the parents have split up.  “It’s not fair to have to drive all the way to work and cut a bit of your earnings just to pay to drive on a road or two.”

67. Another view against road pricing was that by driving first and paying later, drivers could easily run up debts they could not afford to pay.  This could have bad effects on both them and any children they have.

68. One pupil gave a very clear analysis of how road pricing is both complicated and involves unpopular tracking:  “road tax is the easiest way for everyone with a car to pay money.  The other option would be too difficult, and requires tracking of people which isn’t ethical”.

69. Another told us that a side effect of road pricing might be to move traffic jams to different roads:  “having to pay extra to drive on a specific road – people will just take a different road to get where they need to go and the result of that is more people rammed in a side street and more accidents”.

70. Pupils in favour of road pricing also gave a number of different views.  These included agreeing with road pricing as a principle;  “I think drivers should pay per mile and not for using roads”,  “you don’t want to be paying for every road if you only drive on a few”.

71. There was support for charging tolls on motorways;  “because not everyone uses them every day and it would be like America”.

72. Greater road safety was another positive effect seen for road pricing.  By reducing traffic on very busy roads, “it could be safer for motorways and roads, stopping car accidents”.

73. Others thought road pricing would indeed reduce driving overall and so reduce pollution;  “less people would drive on those roads so it would help stop climate change”.  Some saw this happening through road pricing encouraging “active travel” for short journeys, rather than using the car;  “it might encourage people to walk more and it would cause less pollution and climate change”,  “they would have to pay money to go on it so instead they may use public transport, or walk, cycle or run”.

74. Some pupils were ‘in the middle’ on the issue of road pricing.  One said that people could save money if it made them drive less, so they could spend that money on other things – but to make that work, the government would have to accept having less money from drivers in future;  “the government will have some money, anyway”.

75. Some pupils were concerned that the government might in future end up charging drivers both a basic road tax and road prices for using certain roads.  “Some people who are less fortunate than others don’t have enough money to pay for both fees”.  As another put this, “drivers should pay car tax but not road tax.  If they still make drivers pay to drive on the road, then no-one will ever drive”.

76. There was also one general view against any tax on using your car.  The tax should be on buying the car, not again on using it once you have bought it;  “I think tax is unnecessary due to the fact that people have already paid for their car, let alone even more money”.

77. Some children who saw road pricing as likely to result in drivers paying more taxes than before, or even both a road tax and extra tolls for many roads, were torn between people finding this difficult to afford, and the possible uses of the extra taxation money for important things.  “Some people will be struggling financially so this can be hard, so against it.  But the fees people pay could be paid to hospitals to help with the Covid-19 vaccines.” 

78. These votes and views give the Committee evidence of the extent and nature of the support and opposition to road pricing, from a significant number of children as members of the public.

Use of taxes raised by road pricing

79. How tax money raised by any road pricing scheme is used is important to what the public is likely to think about the scheme.

80. So we asked the children which of five different things they thought the tax money from any future road pricing scheme should be spent on.  Here are the five options, listed in the order the children rated them, with the one they most wanted the money spent on at the top:

First;  fighting climate change, rather than on other things the government does for people

Second;  on making roads better and safer, rather than on other things the government does for people

In equal third place;

on hospitals, doctors and nurses, rather than on other things the government does for people, and

it doesn’t matter, as long as it’s spent on things people need the government to do for them

and lastly;  on making it cost drivers less to drive a car or van, rather than on other things the government does for people.

81. One view about how road pricing taxes could be spent to improve the road network was that “if you pay just a little for some roads then you can create more roads you don’t need to pay for”.  Another pupil had supported road pricing as a way of raising money to fill holes in roads.

Different road pricing schemes

82. We asked the children, again applying their fresh thinking to the question, which of two government options for a road pricing scheme struck them as the fairer and the better one.

83. The children voted, by 30 votes to 20, in favour of drivers paying the same rate for every mile they drive, rather than having the first 3,000 miles (4,000 in the countryside) free, and then paying a higher amount for each mile after that.  Many (24 children) were in the middle between these two options.

The idea of tracking vehicles to calculate how much road pricing tax should be charged

84. After this, we asked the children to think about the issue of cars and vans being tracked to work out how far and where they had been driven, and therefore how much road pricing tax should be paid.

85. We asked them whether or not it would worry them if where their family car or van goes is being tracked for this purpose.  The majority (56% of the 71 answering this question) said yes, this tracking would worry them.  23% said it would not worry them, and 21% said they were in the middle on the issue.

86. We invited them to give their own views on the idea of tracking, as usual without any suggestions or adult lead being given.

87. Overall, more children had negative views about the idea or tracking, than those who were in favour.  There were 12 negative comments but only 4 positive ones.  There were also some mixed comments, giving both pros and cons of tracking.

88. Against tracking were the views that “tracking people’s cars is just wrong and it should be illegal”,  “if I am being tracked I would be frightened because it would be a risk of privacy”,  “if cars ARE tracked, people wouldn’t want to go anywhere”, “some people might think they are being followed”,  “you should not track people’s cars, it’s creepy”.

89. This quotation from one child summed up the negative reaction to the idea of tracking;  “people should not be tracked and should have the freedom not to be tracked”.

90. There was a view that if there is to be tracking because of road pricing, and there is to be road pricing because of the switch to electric cars, then we should “stop the process of electric cars”.

91. On the more positive side, one child said “if it is only tracking the car or van’s distance on the road and then it makes a bill of how much you need to pay, then that is alright with me” – then added “but if it tracks anything else then I am concerned”. 

92. Others saw some good side effects to cars and vans being tracked.  Tracking could help catch criminals, and it could help to recover your car or van if it was stolen. Another wrote that “if we track all cars or vans or any mode of transport, you would potentially be able to see if people are doing things they shouldn’t be as well as checking speed limits and tax payment”.

93. One who saw both pros and cons to tracking wrote:  “it would invade my privacy as they would know about everywhere you are going and it would be a bit creepy.  On the plus side, if someone got lost in their car the government could find them.”  (This pupil was not the only one who wrote that tracking would be “creepy”). 

94. Another wrote that “if you get it tracked you know where your car is, but when you go out in it people can see where you’re going and where you are”.  Finally, was the view “it would help police, but I do not like the idea”.

95. Others were very unsure about the whole thing.  Being tracked on the road felt very much like losing more and more of your privacy nowadays on social media sites.  One pupil wrote “I feel like I’ve already been tracked by mobile phones and computers”.  Another wrote simply “I’m not sure about being tracked”.

If there is to be tracking, who should do it?

96. We also asked children for their fresh thinking about the government’s list of possible bodies and organisations that might do the tracking.  Without leading them in any way, we simply asked them to mark which of the listed organisations they would rather do the tracking for any road pricing scheme.

97. Their top preference was more of a principle than an organisation.  In first place, they opted to agree with the statement ‘it really doesn’t matter, as long as they do the job and keep the information private’.

98. Their second preference, a long way behind this, was for the government to do the tracking.  Their third preference was for it to be done by a special company doing just this one job.  This was followed by it being done by a motoring organisation like the AA or RAC.  There was very little support for the job to be done by the local council or a mobile phone company.  There was no support at all for a supermarket company to take the job on.

A concluding message

99. Our evidence suggests that children are overall in favour of electric vehicles and of switching to new vehicles being electric rather than petrol or diesel as soon as there are enough charging points around.  But it also suggests that children are not overall in support of replacing usual car tax with a road pricing scheme.  And they are strongly against tracking vehicles for a road pricing scheme.  The unpopularity of tracking increases opposition to road pricing, and if tracking comes with road pricing following a switch to electric vehicles, that risks putting some off the idea of electric vehicles.

My thanks

100.                    I am grateful to the Heads of the four schools which took part in the consultation for this submission, to the members of staff of each school who facilitated their pupils taking part despite the challenges of school closure during lockdown, and above all to the children and young people themselves for their thinking and views on this important subject.

February 2021