UK ANTI_STAG LEGISLATION

[Mike Wattam <MikeWattam@domain.elided>]

The document referred to by Mr Clayton misleads the public and is already
the subject of intense lobbying within the classic car movement, both by
individual clubs and by the FBHVC.

The background is that the EU in Brussels has motivated this change in
legislation and extended the time the UK government has to bring the
legislation into force (should have been introduced in 1998 as it was in
Germany), and the "discussion document" has only been issued to satisfy the
labour governments election manifesto of being a 'listening government' for
the people.  Therefore, the probability of the replies deflecting the
government from their chosen action is remote.

I have had discussions in Brussels with Messrs Kinnock and Van Miert about
15 months ago now, and they did assure me that the Commission had no
intention of introducing retrospective legislation (of ANY kind) which
imposed higher standards or punitive taxation on users of old vehicles.

However, I would still urge you to reply to the questionaire, but I suggest
you go right to the end of the document and complete the last box (Question
25) as your priority.  The most important issues we need to bring to their
attention are;

1.  Many of the questions are hopelssly biased and lead the reader down a
particular and presumably government-desired path, even to the extent of
'break points' and amounts of money suggested.
2.  The fact remains that much of this document amounts to retrospective
legislation which is likely to penalise owners of older cars who either
cannot afford new efficient cars, or deliberately choose to own classic,
veteran and vintage cars as a hobby and who complete very small annual
mileages.
3.  It clearly flies in the face of the simple fact that those who do more
miles, produce more pollution.  Therefore an additional tax on fuel by the
unit and a compensating reduction in Vehicle Excise Duty would appear to be
a more than clear step to take.  It would also encourage business users who
do the vast majority of the mileage, to limit their mileages and/or plan
their routes better.

Better still, it would be very productive to write to your MP irrespective
of his/her party, especially if you have one who is either Conservative or
Lib-dem.  A crucial issue which has been ignored and you need to bring
firmly to the attention of your MP, is the 'built in 1972' rule which has
been 'frozen' from its original 25 year break point.  It looks very much as
though cars built between 1973 and 1991 will be particularly badly hit in
terms of taxation as these are the cars the document targets and they
therefore want to cost off the road.  A rolling 20 years old rule would be
ideal as it would penalise only the 'bangers' not in the classic car
movement.

Can I at this point suggest you think about all the frustrating and hard
work being put into this matter (and other issues) by the FBHVC and some of
the classic car clubs, and consider putting your hand in your pocket to
either become an individual member of the FBHVC or of one of those
individual classic car clubs which have over the past few years been
consistently fighting vigorously on your behalf (Clubs such as the TSR) on
many governmental and political issues. 

The next one we are already fighting is the recent granting of rights to
town councils to close roads and/or confiscate vehicles producing 'excess
pollution'.  The effect of this is going to be more profound than Gatso's
or drink-drive.

Please remember the time constraint for your comments - the end of this
month.

Good luck

Mike Wattam
Chairman - Triumph Stag Register