The Government’s decision to review the zero emission vehicle mandate has exposed a sharp divide across the automotive industry over whether the policy needs to be softened or defended.
Yet beneath that disagreement lies a significant point of consensus. Manufacturers, dealer groups, fleets, rental operators, skills bodies and charging companies all want a successful transition to electric vehicles. The dispute is over whether today’s targets are accelerating that transition or destabilising it.
The case for recalibration
For dealerships, the immediate concern is commercial sustainability. Sue Robinson, chief executive of the National Franchised Dealers Association, said: “The industry has made significant progress in increasing the availability and choice of electric vehicles, but the market must remain commercially sustainable.
“The results from the consultation need to ensure consumers have the choice and affordability needed to make the transition.”
That call for pragmatism was amplified by Enterprise Mobility, Zenith, United Rental Group and Vertu Motors. In a joint response, the businesses argued that regulation alone could not persuade motorists to switch and called for a “more realistic trajectory”, greater flexibility for manufacturers and stronger support for genuine demand.
A market caught in a loop
At the heart of their case is a market caught in a difficult loop. Manufacturers are discounting new EVs to meet mandated targets, weak used demand is placing pressure on residual values and those falling values feed back into the cost of financing new vehicles.
The problem is also one of unequal access. Zenith chief executive Richard Jones described a “two-tier running cost reality” in which the financial case for switching depends heavily on whether a driver has access to domestic charging.
“If you can charge from home, you will save money by switching to a BEV, and if you mainly rely on public charging, it will cost you more when compared to a petrol or diesel car,” he said.
If Jones identified the structural weakness in the market, Vertu Motors chief executive Robert Forrester delivered its most uncompromising diagnosis. He argued that the mandate had distorted the new car sector by forcing manufacturers to spend billions of pounds stimulating demand through discounts.
“Its targets and the threat of fines have led to billions of pounds in discounts on battery electric vehicles to increase demand,” Forrester said. “This has meant fewer jobs, lower investment and reduced economic activity across the whole sector with profit pools reduced.”
Targets outpace EV demand
The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders reached much the same conclusion in more measured language. Its position is that the mandate was conceived when energy was cheaper, production costs were expected to fall more quickly and forecasts for global EV demand were more optimistic.
Chief executive Mike Hawes said: “Regulatory targets are now running ahead of current consumer demand, so this review is a timely opportunity to optimise the pace of change.
“This is a regulation that increasingly dictates consumer choice, and therefore automotive companies’ future strategies and viability, so it must work for all involved.”
EV skills gap threatens transition
But sales targets and consumer incentives are only part of the equation. Even if sufficient numbers of EVs can be placed into the market, the industry must still have the people capable of maintaining them safely throughout their working lives.
That concern was brought into sharp focus by Institute of the Motor Industry research showing 82% of members lacked confidence that the workforce would be ready at the required pace. A further 79% doubted the transition could be delivered safely and sustainably.
“The destination remains clear, but what everyone needs, from manufacturers to frontline dealers and garages and, of course, motorists, is absolute clarity on the pace and pathway to get there,” said IMI chief executive Nick Connor.
“The constant uncertainty has done nothing to motivate businesses to commit to the essential upskilling that is needed.”
Charging investment needs certainty
On the other side of the debate, however, the same uncertainty is being used to argue against changing the mandate.
Charging providers and EV advocates contend that the policy has created the confidence needed to invest, expand infrastructure and bring new products to market. From their perspective, reopening the rules risks disrupting progress at precisely the point when adoption is gathering pace.
That warning carries particular weight among businesses committing capital years ahead of expected demand. InstaVolt chief executive Delvin Lane said: “Ultra-rapid charging investment doesn’t happen on the back of uncertainty.
“We’ve invested hundreds of millions of pounds into the UK’s charging network because government policy gave us a clear runway to plan against. Softening the mandate at this stage risks spooking exactly the private capital that’s been building the infrastructure this transition depends on.”
EV supporters also reject the suggestion that consumer demand has stalled. They point to battery electric vehicles accounting for 27% of new registrations in July, with volumes rising strongly year-on-year, as evidence that the mandate is beginning to work.
Could compromise break the deadlock?
Between the two camps lies the possibility of compromise. Electrifying.com chief executive Ginny Buckley said she would prefer the existing mandate to remain intact but could see a pragmatic case for a 2030 target closer to 60% and continued recognition for plug-in hybrids with meaningful electric-only range.
Her wider warning, however, was that repeated changes of direction could prove more damaging than either version of the policy.
“Whatever Government decides, it then needs to stick,” Buckley said. “Drivers need confidence in where we’re heading, and the charging industry needs certainty to keep investing ahead of demand.”
Evidence from Carwow suggests that policy speculation is already influencing buying behaviour. Of more than 1,100 prospective buyers surveyed, 57% said talk of mandate changes had left them less confident about which powertrain to choose, while 52% said the uncertainty made them more likely to delay their next purchase.
What the ZEV review means for dealers
The consultation has therefore opened a fault line that runs through the entire automotive market. One side believes recalibration is essential because regulation has raced ahead of consumer demand. The other fears that retreating now would weaken the investment and confidence required to bring that demand forward.
For dealerships, the real test will not simply be whether the targets rise or fall. It will be whether the final policy can bridge the widening gap between the vehicles manufacturers are required to sell and those that private buyers, used car customers and businesses are genuinely ready and able to purchase.
Ensure you always receive AM insights. Make us a preferred source of news on Google