The "final phase" of implimenting the exhaust emmission rules for most cars imported into New Zealand will come into force on January 1, 2012 and the importers are worried that will reduce used imports by half. They have launched a campaign to get a two year deferral of these rules.
Basically, car and truck importers will be limited to importing vehicles no less than ten year old, and those vehicles will need to meet the 2005 manufacturing country emission standards in force when they were built.
The importer's problem is that about 2005, emission standards and testing requirements got way tougher in Japan at that time. And cars being imported need to be tested in Japan and certified as compliant, before being imported into New Zealand.
It is a piece of policy enacted by the previous Labour government, and brought considerable scorn from the then-National opposition principally because it could have the perverse effect of raising emmissions.
But it is not clear that the National government is about to take its own recommendations. In 2009, Steven Joyce has previously confirmed that the new policy would stay in effect. He seems unlikely to change now, and the importers have spoken briefly to the Prime Minister about their concerns.
The argument is that these tough new standards will kill off the importing of used imports, forcing up the price of used cars in New Zealand, and encourage drivers to hold on to their old cars for longer.
Those opposing the implimentation of the final phase include the vehicle testing industry, like MTA-owned VTNZ, who say they will lose "30 to 40 employees ... we estimate about 20% to 30% of compliance sites would be forced to be closed ..." All up, the industry employers claim up to 300 people may lose their jobs as a result, "specific skills lost ... that would be difficult to replace."
The Imported Motor Vehicle Industry Association (IMVIA) claims used imports will drop from "between 95,000 and 110,000 used vehicles in 2011" down to "between 45,000 and 60,000 units" if the final rules are allowed to be implimented. They say that means about 40,000 cars per year will stay on the road per year getting older and older, increasing their emissions as they age.
It will certainly mean we will need to pay more for used imports - the cost of cleaner vehicles.
But the new-car importers are not sympathetic. While saying "it is not our fight", they are not supporting the used importers, accusing them of a short-term approach to the issue.
The last tab in this chart plots used car imports.
New vehicles sold
Select chart tabs
19 Comments
Hey - lets not forget the environment here and the 'clean green' image. Aus has introduced Euro 4 standards and we have very few. We don't want to import old 'dirty' cars here. Time to catch up with the rest of the world. 10 year old imports are old enough. There is a reason the rest of the world has tough standards. Get real.
I don't know what your point is. As a nation we can't import polluting smelly old cars. Are cars expensive? When they were locally assembled (a heater and radio were an additional extras) a car cost a years wages. Now you can buy a car for less than 6 months wages.
Do we sacrifice the environment for cheap cars? We should have international pollution and safety standards. Pollution and unsafe cars cost lives.
If you look at the figures our balance of payments isn't too bad. Our financilal accounts are better than many countries in the West and our unemployment is half that of the USA.
"Now you can buy a car for less than 6 months wages"
You talking a new car? The median wage is $529/week, take home about $460 or $23k/year. That still equates to 12 months pay to buy the most basic new car.
"If you look at the figures our balance of payments isn't too bad".
What? We've only been running a current account deficit for forty years, how bad does it need to get before enoughs enough. We now need to export twenty percent more than we import just to stand still thanks to interest payments and profits to our foreign owners.
Your suggestion that cars over 15 years should be scrapped doesn't make sense, these "modern" Japanese cars are fine up to the 300k range and 20 years age or more if properly looked after. The difference in emissions is to small to justify trashing a perfectly OK car, what a waste.
It seems to me our society is just falling apart. Greed of a minority and money which isn’t distributed fairly is a major factor why. A majority of our population is living beyond their means and have to make sacrifices in their daily life’s when they shouldn’t. It is just a matter of time and we are among third world nations with low quality standards.
Introduction – in a few words.
Listening to our economists/ politicians sitting in offices in the 2nd floors+ upstairs- studying economics from old books and charts comparing and analyzing. Yes, yes, yes all good, but in today’s ever and fast changing real life – not more then telling us more about our “Traditional Patchwork Economy” (TPE) – with some exceptions to be fair.
Well, the world is struggling, fast moving and changing for ever- time for New Zealand to find visionary solutions.
In the current situation it is probably wiser to listen to philosophers, environmentalists, ecologists and humanists (I’m not religious - sorry) and find the right answers to solve our upcoming challenges.
Greed & Megalomania
The people of New Zealand are not only suffering under too much consumption but Greed, Megalomania of a minority – including corruption and a bloated government without a clear economic direction for years.
How much longer is the younger generation waiting for a revolt in “Beautiful New Zealand” ? The “Powerfools” in this and other countries are not only destroying theirs, the public’s natural environment, the land, the waterways and the air, but also their future, our souls and pride. The BB generation is currently causing enormous damage in our society not investing, but for them selves– costing this, but especially the next generation Billions to clean up the mess in may sectors/ levels. Not to mention our bubbly Property Industry – making our NZkids renting flats on Rock Creek Rd or worse, while foreigners living in flash houses on Orchid Park Drive – HA this is all crazy!
Ethics- Philosophy- Economy
More and more country are losing the battle against a clean and green environment, healthy food supply/ production, fresh water and air – quality of life. As a remote and rather under-populated country we have an exceptional chance to be different. The key is branding New Zealand - the introduction of a “GREEN & CLEAN” economic philosophy – why ?
---
For years our economy is so unbalanced, unstructured and unorganised- badly managed, when serious philosophical questions have to be asked. What is New Zealand way of life in the 21st century ?
The large and increasing national account deficit seems to force the government into stupid actions of desperation. Obviously falling into a trap by considering revenues form:
- natural resources damaging our environment/ nature and eco- tourism -
- opening more land for extensive (dairy) farming destroying our environment, undermining animal welfare standards and in disregard of the influence of climate changes –
- doggy immigration policies leading to social, employment and housing problems etc.-
- it doesn’t create skilful jobs (see below) -
--
I’m proposing a clear, consistent, long term strategy for our economy to be the world leader:
“New Zealand’s Green Sustainable Economy Model of the World”
http://www.green-innovations.asn.au/econ-mdl.htm
Such a model would make us unique in the world, inspires, lift ethics, spirit, pride among the population and feed into many sectors of our economy and society. But it also supports strong and already existing sectors. It would make Billions in revenue, the country would prosper.
--
Industry and Ecology
Today and in the future “Green Industries” offer new, good opportunities for NZ’s economy. Manufacturing Research & Development in sectors like Power, Transport and Telecommunication, in fields where we relay on foreign dependency most, even to a degree that our national security is at risk is essential. The government needs to pick winners, so building sustainable niche markets, producing and branding quality goods for us and to cover export demand will be successful.
Energy, Public Transport, Telecommunication
Two examples of how we should proceed with infrastructure needs in Energy and other such as Public Transport:
Financially and economically it doesn’t make sense to import or to produce heavy and expensive machinery/ equipment like turbines/ generators, nuclear power plants or heavy trains.
Such imports are mostly under overseas contracts, managed and installed by overseas technicians and workers, without hardy any local workforce especially skilled ones.
In stead we should research, develop and produce –SMALLER UNITS- manufactured and installed by Kiwis in our own country. A step, when ordered by government with enormous, but positive implication for our country:
- increase employment opportunity -
- better education after school –
- technical skill and knowledge improvements -
- higher wages/ imports of brainpower –
- positive influence to other sectors/ fields such as Science and Research -
- less quality imports / reduction of account deficit -
- control and sovereignty –
- quality infrastructure services –
- national security improvement –
- almost no affects caused by natural events -
Sustainable Public Transport - developing a sector of industry to cover public mobility within a 100- 150km radius. Innovative businesses producing SMALL QUALITY UNITS starting from bikes, scoters, light rail systems and the interaction within, hardly seen in other countries. All planned, developed, installed, maintained and ran by Kiwis.
Sustainable Power supply/ savers SMALLER QUALITY UNITS developed, produced, locally/ regional installed and ran/ maintained by Kiwis.
We do need a “Mixed Economy Model” with a clear strategy to master the international dependency on fossil fuel, gas and power consumption.
Please, read and understand this article in context to my many other articles.
Walter Kunz 20.8.2009 (edited slightly in 2010)
In a nutshell, you have to exaluate the build against the operation.
It takes some 100's of 1000's of km's (sometimes 300,000km's) for the environmental cost of the build, to be outpaced by the running savings.
Remember, this is only on the difference, the whole build has to be outweighed by the difference in efficiency.
I have a 1985 Diesel Landcruiser - an old slugger. It does about 2-300km a year, almost all specific jobs on the property.
There will NEVER be an environmental-impact scenario where replacing this existing vehicle, will be better for the planet. There IS an argument for keeping it going indefinitely, though.
You have to be careful to compare apples with apples.
Sounds like an unrealistic utopia to me Kunst. It is totally unrealistic to build small high tech self sustaining industry to avoid importing equipment from overseas. For the same reason we no longer have to put up with over priced under speced cars we should not develop small uneconomic industries here. We should import commuter trains from Korea and cars from Australia and Japan. They can do it cheaper and better than we can and deliver on time.
I don't see any green groundswell nor political will to create a true clean and green NZ. Many green initiatives have been quietly dismantled yet I don't see protests in the streets. Take carbon credits and charging. All the press states that it is a cost. No where are the reasons for doing it stated or sold to the public. Carbon charges are there to discourage dirty industry and encourage clean ones. Yet all we hear is the cost, not the benefits.
Nz us way behind any kind of environmental standards in the likes of pollution control and recycling in cars for example. In Germany if you sell a car you have to take it back at the end of its life and recycle the bits. Here we can just dump it. Why don't our new cars have to meet Euro 4 standards? Because buyers here bleat abut a cost. Clean and Green be damned!
Like it or not we are part of globalisation and I think we should be.
If you are worried about the economy it can be easily fixed but the measures are not politically acceptable:
Capital gains testing
Means testing of all pensions and benefits.
Efficient tax system that encourages work and productivity.
Token charging or financial incentives for secondary education.
Higher costs for running a car so that public transport is encouraged eg electronic tolls on highways. $1000/year car rego. Compulsory insurance.
Increased mining and oil drilling.
How many of these things could be introduced without comitting political suicide?
We need to produce the things we do well, not try to do uneconomic things that can't be done well with 4 mil people.
We can't live in a small village or more of our young will go overseas. The opportunities have never been better for young people who are well qualified and skilled. They can live anywhere in the world they want to.
Just as Fontera can set up new businesses in China, other countries must be allowed to invest here.
By the way Powderdownkiwi, your Landrover would not have a crash ratingof any sort. No airbags, nor catalytic converter to reduce emissions and would have a high CO2 output. Just as well you only drive it a few hundred k's a year. I agree that embedded energy has to be considered but cars over 15 years should be crushed and recycled.
Well I think you are wrong somewhat wrong....in one respect example, trying to make 100,000 cars here in NZ that most ppl could not afford compared to importing that number from a production line far cheaper makes no sense its wasteful in money and resources. It is in effect a commodity item on a small margin.
However the opposite is true of say electrical generating windmill-turbines. If the annual need is a few thousands and they all differ slightly (per site) then making such units in NZ where small productions lines make sense because of the flexibility required then this is a good idea...On top of that if we have say only 10,000 workers skilled in such fields then these should be going to work at the high value industries and not the commodity.....
regards
It often amuses me how JK et al go on about tourism and our 100% pure bs. Yet when a tourist arrives by air, in travelling from the airport the first thing they see of our commitment to 100% pure are some vehicles belching pollution. I have yet to pick up a tourist from the airport where lack of vehicle emmission controls isn't commented on within the first 10or so kms of our 3hr journey home.
As a former used car dealer/importer I have a little sympathy for the import industry - but not enough to agree with their "doom and gloom" predictions, which I've heard many times over the years when new regulations/restrictions are introduced. The 2005 emission standard rule may make it hard to import for a couple of years, but its not the end of the world. Yes, buying in Japan is increasingly difficult and we simply can no longer compete with many other countries on the price for second-hand vehicles. And yes, of course the new car industry is jumping up and down, applauding wildly the new regulations. Anything that restricts the availability of vehicles in our market is always going to be great news for them and I would expect their political clout will have given extra impetus to the move. They're quite naturally just pushing their self-interest barrow as much as the second-hand importers are theirs. However, the reality is that we must take seriously both the emissions issue and the need to wean ourselves off our private car habits. Whether or not these proposed regulations will make much difference, I'm unsure.
On the 10 year max I agree with the new regulation. Some importers play a volume game, where age and quality are compromised for the sake of getting units through the doors. While the 10yr rule won't cancel that out completely, it does make sense to ensure that the high cost (financial and environmental) of importing a vehicle from Japan is not added to by an overly aged and reduced life car landing on our shores. A more effective additional stipulation, I believe, would be to restrict all imports to under 100km on the odometer (maybe even 85k). What you want coming in is genuine lower km 5-9yr old cars that have still lots of good life in them before they get into the heavy maintenance years. To me it makes no sense to bring in a 120k'er, even if its 3yrs old.
I would be even more supportive of the new regulations if the Govt made a stronger commitment to increase public transport options in our cities. If you decrease availability of cheap cars (and increase the price) you need to offset this with making cheaper, more efficient public transport a reality. Unfortunately, the noises coming from ministers about not viewing expensive rail/light rail projects in Auckland (in particular) and Wellington (to a lesser extent) as high priority, while partly understandable given the fiscal restraints, just does not make any sense to me. They are investments that have been hedged for far too many decades - which is partly why the sums look so intimidating now. But we have to take a long term view. There's less that our sparsely populated country can do to reduce reliance on private vehicles outside of the big centres, but within Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch there should be no excuse for working hard to incentivise people out of cars.
If the Dunedin bus was 50 cents I would always take public trans port- but it cost $20 a day for me and my son (about $120 a week) to take the bus and about $20 week to drive the car (disregarding WoF and reg). I think we would save a fortune in health costs if we made public transport cheap. People walking to and from the bus/train stop. People being socal- rather than solitary. The everyday use of cars is physically and psychologically debilitating.
Basically it is an industry that is struggling primarily because of the overall down turn.
The only way they can see to stay on top is to take a gamble import cheaper lower quality older cars and cross their fingers...But they cant come out and say that. The only thing left is to import these older cars, to the detriment of the NZ consumer who has to come up with the savings to to repair them, and the importation of the expensive parts.
In effect they want to bring in cars with a shorter life and also pick up the profits of importing and selling these parts...Thats getting damn close to a Rort.
Bottom line, if they cant import to the requirements of legislation which they have been very aware of for a long time, and to the demands of the consumer, buy at an affordable price to suit that market...they are in and industry that is obsolete as when the washing board was obsoleted by the washing machine.
Anyone know a washing board retailer or manufacture? how about a steam train? or a dial phone?
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.