Good. Now slap a 300% luxury tax on them too. Exclude the utes with the steel trays.
They should just be banned period. I haven’t seen any reasonable arguments for why a ute needs to be 50% larger today than it was in the 90’s.
Otherwise there should be taxes based on size, weight, and fuel efficiency. It only makes sense as the larger the vehicle, the greater its impact on traffic and parking space, the more damage it does to the road, and the more damage it does to the environment.
Because now the ute is a holiday/recreation vehicle whose expenses can be written off for work as opposed to a pure work vehicle.
If we did ban them, I think the economy would be better off overall. For the majority of trades, vans are a way more efficient work vehicle. Using a big ute for the daily school runaround is simply inane. The only winners of big ute are the automakers and campground operators.
Height barriers at car park entrances might be an idea. Suv owners would not be able to park. Deterrent enabled!
They kept mentioning safety issues being a factor; I wish they had at least mentioned some of them. It could’ve helped spread that information and taught people something.
To be fair the first time they mention “safety impacts” the words “safety impacts” is actually a link to a study on the subject. It would be better to include a brief summation since no one is going to pause reading an article in the first paragraph to read a study.
Some bullet points from the linked study:
-
Children are eight times more likely to die when struck by a SUV compared to children struck by a passenger car.
-
Passenger cars are underrepresented in fatal pedestrian and pedal-cyclist fatalities.
-
SUVs struck 14.7% of the pedestrians and pedal-cyclists studied, but were involved in 25.4% of the fatalities.
-
Blacks are overrepresented as pedestrian and pedal-cyclist crash victims.
-
Hospital charges are highest among those struck by pickup trucks, and those aged 65 and older.
-
Regulatory interventions may help reduce the harm caused to human bodies by large motor vehicles.
But yeah, perhaps a quick summary in the main article would have been helpful.
-
“The inner-suburban Yarra city council voted on Tuesday to investigate whether parking fees should be increased for larger vehicles such as SUVs and trucks due to safety concerns”
If there are safety concerns, raising the price of parking just puts a price on them, it doesn’t make these vehicles any safer.
True, but this should at least discourage people from buying these vehicles, and collecting some revenue in the process (which in the case of cash starved local councils is a good thing). It would take a federal government effort to ban these vehicles altogether I suspect.
Not sure I agree with this as any solution, tokeninstic at best, the asshats who can afford $100k+ for a ute won’t give a shit about increased parking fees, well enough of a shit to complain but not enough to stop them. Just ban them.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The Yarra city council unanimously voted on Tuesday to investigate the potential to raise parking fees for large vehicles.
Experts have previously pointed to manufacturers doubling their spend on advertising SUVs and utes over the past decade, and various tax perks such as the instant asset write-off scheme, as factors that have been nudging Australians towards larger vehicles in recent years.
The inner-suburban Yarra city council voted on Tuesday to investigate whether parking fees should be increased for larger vehicles such as SUVs and trucks due to safety concerns.
Environmental groups hailed it as a template for other cities to make streets safer and air cleaner as sales of heavy vehicles soar.
A similar initiative is already in place in the French city of Lyon, while the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, said prior to the vote that he would monitor the effectiveness of Paris’s plan if it was approved.
In 2008, the City of Sydney introduced “green concessions” for residential parking permits in the council area to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
The original article contains 784 words, the summary contains 173 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
