Stellantis has come out and said that its commitment to electric vehicles made in the UK is under threat due to an EU edict. It is that all cars exported from the UK to the EU must eventually have 65% UK/EU content or face 10% duties. I don't know why such a rule was insisted upon.
What is of interest is that Nissan is pressing ahead with electric vehicle production in Sunderland, UK despite the machinations of politicians. How is Nissan achieving this? Through a battery plant built adjacent to the car assembly facility. Make no mistake, this is a substantial commitment by Nissan and its project partners.
Nissan has made the Leaf model in the UK since late 2012 and making batteries for it at its Sunderland plant. This new initiative will take battery production capacity to another level. A new crossover electric model is to be produced at the plant with up to 100,000 units to be made per annum.
As for the Leaf, over 250,000 have now been built in the UK. The chart shows annual production volume and one would think that the push for electric cars in the UK and Europe would ensure continued healthy production for the Leaf as well as the future crossover model. Battery plants are needed and Nissan Sunderland has that box ticked.
I really like your website but these are the kind of articles that baffle me. Unlike the statistics, this one is somehow opinionated that tries to line up both emotional wording ("edict") and ignoring facts.
ReplyDeleteRules of origin is part of EVERY decent industrialised economic policy. It serves to make sure that those who wish to benefit from a market, will have contribute to its GDP. The power of rules of origin largely depends on the size of the market.
The EU is the greatest free trade experiment in history. It did not just allow truly frictionless trade, but established an institutional framework unrivalled in efficiency compared to international organisations. For a manufacturer it is like operating in a really big country.
Also, it is not just Stallantis that "said" that Brexit threatens their plans. Ford and JLR also joined them with similar messages. This is serious.
Nissan is the only remaining argument for brexiteers to somehow still pleader for their dignity.
But we still don't have the full picture why the Japanese manufacturers are less vocal about Brexit. Could be that Toyota is simply busy with catching up with the lost decades of ignoring electrification, and Nissan lost a figure like Ghosn who had no issues with public statements demanding policy changes at highest levels (his fights with Macron and Abe were publicised by press echoes). Or maybe they hope to recover any losses through the agreements Japan signed with May in 2017.
Europe is going through the largest market boom right now, some manufacturers report 30-40% increases in the European markets (according to ACEA report) over Q1.
There is a lot money to be made, and current policy decisions can decide over the fate of the entire industry.
I thought the article was for the most part offering positive suggestions. The article was also full of facts. Your not agreeing with what I wrote doesn't mean facts were ignored, just a differing interpretation.
ReplyDeleteDoes the EU insist that when a car is imported from anywhere outside the UK that it meet strict content percentages or face additional import duty? A genuine question I don't know.
Ford makes no vehicles in the UK, just petrol/diesel engines. It will have to decide what to do when such engines are no longer required. I don't see Ford's situation needed a negative public statement. JLR has the opportunity to source batteries from the UK if it commits to the project mentioned.
Some companies like to exert pressure to minimise effort or initiative on their part. Some public statements aren't worth a pinch of salt.
As for human leadership, it's hard to talk about anything without it coming into focus. Decisions made by governments affect so much of our lives. However, I don't enjoy seeing the divisions and frictions that politicians seem to invariably create.
In a divorce, both sides can choose to make it a smooth or an acrimonious break up. When politicians deal with the end of a relationship, one can assume it will be the latter. There is no need for it but they can't seem to help themselves. I'm not taking sides here but it takes two to make a change in a relationship work.
We need good government. I'm all for the best governance but I don't see it anywhere. For now it's compromised rule and that is better than nothing. We can only hope for something better in the future.