The somewhat mysterious arm of central government known as the Highways Agency has recently appointed a new traffic director for motorways and trunk roads. His name is Derek Turner, and he introduced London's red route and congestion charging schemes. From what I can gather, he's hardly a friend of the car driver. The official word from his new employer is that he will lead the Agency's work into a new era of traffic management. What does that entail exactly?

According to one highly respected national newspaper it means, among other things, that the new man "wants cars off motorways". I've already requested an interview with Mr Turner, and when he finds the time to see me I'll give him the chance to confirm or deny he plans to remove private family vehicles from the largest, fastest and safest roads we have at our disposal. In the meantime, I've only got what he said to the paper to go on. It's alleged our new traffic director has "denounced" drivers who take up space on motorways, and claimed the routes should be the preserve of vehicles such as lorries. He controversially argues trucks are of more economic importance.

Turner is quoted as saying: "A lot of the problem is to do with people joining the motorway at one junction and coming off at the next. If they can't get on to the network so easily they will probably choose to use totally acceptable trunk roads."

It gets worse. He's also allegedly accused car-driving commuters of "inappropriate use of road space". This is worrying stuff. Every one of the above arguments can be ripped to shreds. Why, for instance, would anybody in their right mind want to take cars off the safest, most efficient, generally free-flowing, pedestrian and cycle-free motorways and divert them on to more dangerous, narrower, generally clogged neighbouring roads where vulnerable walkers and bike riders are present?

Why should a lorry (especially one belonging to an overseas operator not paying UK road levies) have priority over a commuter who has bought, taxed and insured their own car? If and when Turner somehow manages to stop some drivers joining motorways, what are they supposed to do if there aren't any acceptable trunk roads to use as an alternative? Presumably, they'll have to go through built-up areas where they might be hit with the very congestion charges Derek Turner supports.

Perhaps he might be better looking at yet another classic example of roads mismanagement. We have two football clubs - Manchester United and Newcastle United - from the north west and north east of England respectively, being forced to play a cup tie in south Wales. Thousands of loyal fans will waste countless hours plus huge quantities of fuel and money getting to the game. Why the footballing authorities didn't choose a more local neutral venue such as Elland Road, Leeds, to cut down massively on journey times, cost, pollution and accident risk is utterly beyond me.

Mike Rutherford
Article from: Auto Express

I bumped into Jeremy Clarkson, a former member of the Auto Express parish, at an awards bash for journalists the other night. Last time he was at a posh, strictly black tie, industry ceremony like this, he punched my ex-boss, former Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan, in the throat! Needless to say, when I heard that he wanted to talk to me, I was a bit nervous - especially as it was about my column in issue 847, which mentioned him.

If you remember, I sang the praises of Jamie Oliver for managing to get the clueless local and national politicians to listen up to the fact that our kids are getting fed rubbish at school. If a celebrity chef can massively raise the profile of an important, but relatively marginal, issue such as why kids should be eating green veg and not chips through a TV programme, I wondered what Jeremy could do with transport.

Luckily, rather than being mad, Clarkson said he would like to do such a show. What's more, his right-hand man, best friend and producer, Andy Wilman - yet another former Auto Express writer, incidentally - is keen to sell the idea to the BBC.

At this early stage of the game, Clarkson's initial idea is to go to a British town and sort out its roads, traffic, pedestrians, cyclists and parking. No, this is not an excuse for the UK's most famous, knowledgeable and outspoken motoring expert to steam in and do to non-car users what he did to Piers Morgan, far from it. He, Wilman and me are all agreed that one of the first things we'd push for is variable speed limits. We'd also like speed cameras outside all schools. During class hours, they should adopt a zero tolerance approach, but have much more relaxed enforcement at night.

We'd like buses monitored and reduced in frequency if too polluting or empty. And we're keen to see money-motivated parking regulations removed and check out whether allowing drivers to turn left at red lights could help ease congestion. It would be Clarkson's job to make the suggestions, listen to the responses from planners, engineers and politicians, and fight his corner in a symbolic and entertaining battle on behalf of Britain's 50 million beleaguered car drivers and passengers.

Would your town be willing and able to open its doors to Clarkson and allow him to publicly express his forthright but expert views, and perhaps even implement a radical but safe traffic experiment or three? If so, write to me at the usual Auto Express address, explaining why your town is the right place for the show. We'll let you know if you are to receive a visit and enjoy nationwide - or even worldwide - attention by being publicly Clarksonised. Think of it as little more than a valuable, but totally free, consultation from somebody who's been around the world several times and seen first-hand just about every type of traffic management scheme on offer.

Mike Rutherford
Article from: Auto Express

As motoring enthusiasts, you've probably heard that thousands of additional roadside cameras are to be erected. Focusing on number plates, they're to allow criminals and suspects to be monitored on the move. What sort of people are we talking about? Everybody from murderers to those whose road tax has not been renewed on time. Fair enough. But how many serial killers and terrorists do you think these cameras will identify and bring to justice? Very few, if any!

Here's an idea of how intense this camera network will be. There'll be 28 around the Dartford Crossing - a tiny stretch of the M25. Be in no doubt that the major target is people such as you and me, committing minor motoring offences or suffering because of administrative mistakes. We'll be hounded down and heavily fined for our often insignificant car-related offences. (Is the crime of driving a motor with a just-expired tax disc very different from paying a phone bill a week late?). Meanwhile, the real bad guys will remain virtually untouched by the weak arm of the law. Dangerous career criminals who are serious about what they do are several steps ahead of the game.

When, for example, they need to use cars, they perfectly legally ask friends, relatives or other facilitators to buy, register, tax and insure vehicles on their behalf. Alternatively, they'll simply borrow or hire motors from numerous sources which, again, is perfectly legitimate. As is using taxis, the drivers of which might be regularly  monitored while their passengers go unchecked. For obvious reasons, I won't go into precise details here, but there are countless other ways that the real bad boys and girls can stay on the road with little or no hope of ever being noticed, never mind caught.

I mean, for all we know, the world's most wanted terrorist might be in Britain now, clean shaven, hair dyed blonde and driving all day, every day while planning his next move. But what are the chances of this new-look Osama Bin Laden registering a car in his own name? And will he be tempted to disclose on the registration documents the addresses of the numerous safe houses he's basing himself at? Somehow, I think not.

No, drug dealers and killers with any common sense ensure their vehicles are squeaky clean and that any motoring fines are quickly paid. It will guarantee they remain unnoticed by these new cameras. The money generated will be lucrative for the authorities, but any impact on hardcore criminality will be negligible. Smart law enforcers are discreet, and point their cameras in the direction of proper crooks. They target drug-dealing venues, not motorways, and keep quiet about it so as not to give advance warning to the enemy. They don't attend media launches and photo opportunities with Government ministers, which is what our cops are loudly and proudly doing. These cameras will do little more than punish generally honest, hard-working drivers who inevitably make occasional mistakes.

Mike Rutherford
Article from: Auto Express

Worldwide, around 99.9 per cent of the people who've purchased new cars this year have not bought Rovers. In Britain so far in 2005, precisely 98.5 per cent of customers have decided Longbridge-badged products aren't for them. I'm not surprised by the poor demand. The India-built CityRover is the worst new car I've driven in recent years by a long way.

Official sales figures prove that Britons prefer cars from Kia of South Korea, re-vitalised Mazda of Japan and no fewer than 15 other manufacturers from all over the globe. Even MINI, a company with a two-car range, is outselling Rover, which has an extensive but tired line-up of seven small, medium and large derivatives.

The cold, harsh truth is that these stale models aren't wanted by enough people. Consumers are wise enough to know that there are more attractive, better-built, greater value-for-money cars than Rovers. It matters to Britain and even more to the Longbridge workers that the manufacturer and its 6,000 jobs survive in the West Midlands. But they can't, won't and shouldn't because the company is no longer viable.

As Auto Express went to press, there were rumours that the Shanghai Automotive industry Corporation (SAIC) has cleverly landed itself the rights to build the 25 and 75 and other concessions and benefits. Will that save Longbridge? I doubt it. If Rovers are to be built anywhere,  it's my guess that they'll be made by perfectly capable Chinese workers. Why would the SAIC take on comparatively expensive Western employees when it can hire Asian staff at a fraction of the cost?

The outlook isn't merely gloomy for Rover, it's catastrophic. It's now going through a period of bereavement. Understandably, there will be tears. But there is some hope, too. The MG marque is everything the Rover badge isn't - prestigious, admired around the world, credible, still very much alive and, very importantly, not in Chinese hands. Most of the Longbridge site can be developed, and it will hopefully be put to good use for much needed housing, shopping and entertainment on the edge of Birmingham.

MG could keep a corner plot for itself, but I suggest it copies Aston Martin and re-locates to a cheaper site, grabs as many start-up grants and concessions as it can and begins afresh. A reborn MG should acquire a state-of-the-art home, new management (although current design chief Pete Stevens should remain), fresh investors and new low-volume models. This would transform it into a classy English sports car specialist similar to TVR, Caterham and Aston. I'm prepared to put my money where my mouth is by investing my savings into such an all-new company, as long as it has a radically different approach and product range. How about you? Are you with me?

Mike Rutherford
Article from: Auto Express

If I could give understandably worried MG Rover dealers one piece of advice, it would be this: get in touch with Kia. The little firm from South Korea needs you nearly as badly as you need it. Did I say little? Twenty years ago, maybe. But so far in 2005 in Britain, Kia has outsold both Longbridge brands, Fiat, Skoda, SEAT and plenty of other long-established companies, including its red-faced bigger brother, Hyundai. Kia's UK arm saw sales growth of 71.5 per cent in 2003 and 57.8 per cent in 2004. This year, it hopes to shift 44,500 cars in Britain, and 100,000 by the end of the decade.

I couldn't help drawing some comparisons with MG Rover when I attended a bullish Kia press conference at Hwasung, South Korea, earlier this month. This is a hungry firm which is keener on world domination than any other company I know now or have encountered in the past. Kia's sales and financial figures, ambitions and sheer audacity are inspiring if you're already one of the firm's insiders, hugely exciting if you're able to jump on the bandwagon (former MG Rover employees and dealers take note), intriguing for the competition and almost amusing to a neutral onlooker such as me.

Considering Kia is only warming up, it ain't doing bad. It's been the world's fastest-growing car maker for the past three years. It already outsells some Japanese brands in Europe, and plans to overtake Nissan by 2010. You probably suspect the Hwasung facility is Kia's one and only Longbridge-like factory. Nothing could be further from the truth. The firm has several plants in South Korea, 15 overseas facilities and is constructing a billion-dollar factory in Slovakia. Last month, MG was begging to be bailed out by the Chinese. Kia already has a plant in China and another set to start production by next year.

Now to the bit you'll really be interested in - the cars. It's fair to say the line-up is far from exhilarating, but it's getting bigger, better and safer, and being manufactured to a far higher standard. Think Nissan levels of build quality today, and I kid you not, Toyota standards in the not-too-distant future. That's the almost clinical approach of this company. Never mind the world's fastest-growing firm, it's also the most confident.

The finances look good too. In 2004, Kia had revenues of £7.7billion, of which seven per cent was ploughed back into research and development. That means Kia's R&D department is, on its own, worth substantially more than what used to be MG Rover, even when the Longbridge firm was pumping out cars. MG Rover had 6,000 workers, most of whom have been dumped on the scrapheap. If you include the staff at sister company Hyundai, Kia has 110,000 employees and growing. There are dramatic and sometimes brutal changes occurring in the global car business. Workers, dealers and customers can fight them and limp on with obsolete brands like Rover. Or they can acknowledge the new world order and wake up to the arrival of the powerful new kids on the block, such as Kia.

Mike Rutherford
Article from: Auto Express

So keen am I to avoid the ritual of Monday to Friday rush hour driving that I happily do more and more working weekends. There are fewer trucks, buses, white vans, commuting drivers and pedestrians to cope with. My average speed and mpg is greatly improved. And although some seemingly suicidal Sunday drivers and bikers attempt disgraceful moves that they wouldn't even think about on any other day, motoring at the weekend is more relaxing, enjoyable and effective.

I find that even if I'm using motorways, my speed during the week is typically around 30mph, rising to about 50mph in the middle of the day. But my 420-mile round trip to Derbyshire and Staffordshire over a recent weekend enabled me to average 68mph without even trying. For someone who can loosely describe himself as a self-employed, professional driver, covering nearly 70 miles each and every hour is nothing short of a massive and hugely beneficial leap in productivity.

Why was I heading north? Hyundai staged the launch for its new Sonata in middle England. You'd have thought the region would have been grateful for the money the firm puts into the local economy, but there wasn't much evidence of that. Never have I felt so many roadside cameras spying on me. And before anyone comes up with the old cliché that if you're not doing anything wrong there's nothing to fear, may I remind them that when you're driving on roads you haven't seen before where limit signs are conspicuous by their absence, committing minor speed-related infringements is almost inevitable.

Fearing it's the sort of place where an unsuspecting driver could collect 12 points in a day, I and my wallet got out as soon as possible. Had I stayed longer I would have gone shopping, bought a meal, perhaps even checked into a hotel for the night. The final straw was seeing a cop car parked up at the bottom of a hill early on the Sunday morning, ready to nab somebody like me doing an insignificant mile or two over the limit. A few minutes later I saw a police van with its sights set on law-breaking motorists. The vehicle was plastered with nonsense about making Staffordshire safer, but it was parked dangerously - close to a bend on double yellow lines!

When will the police start understanding that such hypocrisy undoes the much needed goodwill between law enforcers and the public? A sticker on the van stated that Staffordshire Police controls this scheme. Only when the force issues a ticket to itself and the individual responsible for parking there pays up will this absurd situation resolve itself. Perhaps Staffordshire could also explain why it has enough cameras to drive motorists such as myself out of the county, an area which needs all the business it can get.

Incidentally, the Sonata didn't disappoint. It badly needs a diesel, but it looks as good as its Japanese rivals and is built just as well, if not better, than most of them.

Mike Rutherford
Article from: Auto Express

Thanks for that F1 Nut 

My thought is that MG Rover would be a stone around Kia / Hyundia's neck.  The company is doing so well why would it want to land itself with something which has been drowning for 10 years and was merely treading water for the 20 or so years previous to that.

With some take-overs they are only after equipment. so who knows what is on there minds

True, and they have had more than a few good ideas like that MG racer thingy which I think would do well for the track if properly developed, perhaps they are hoping to find a marketing gem like BMW did with the Mini so maybe there is something they could learn from the data / research / manufacturing tools for the various cars.

Bad loser? Not me. I thought long and hard, and chose not to vote in the General Election as there simply wasn't a party there for me, a humble and ignored car user! I know I gave up something very precious on 5 May - the hard-fought-for right to at least have a miniscule say in who does or doesn't govern me. But frankly, I would not be true to myself, my beliefs and principles if I put a cross against Tory Blair's war-mongering New Labour party, Frankie Howard's disgracefully blinkered Conservatives or Charlie Boy's bunch of naive Liberal Democrackpots.

While it's not brave enough to publicly admit it, Labour is clearly anti-car, and so are the Lib Dems. Fair enough. At least those of us who sit down and work these things out for ourselves (rather than read the nauseous party manifesto propaganda) know where we stand with these two motorist-bashing political outfits. The Conservatives are slightly different; traditionally, they have tended to be more sympathetic towards the existence of cars and the 50 million people who drive or get driven in them.

And that's why I'm even more angry with the short-sighted Conservatives than the other two. Howard's party did well to win a shade more votes than Labour in England - significant as it's the biggest country in Britain by some margin, with far more voters than Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland put together. But over the whole of Britain, the Conservatives didn't do nearly as well, although they did attract a total of nearly nine million votes against just over nine-and-a-half million for Tony Thatcher's Labour.

But it could so, so easily, have been very different. All Michael Howard had to do was acknowledge and make several genuine, costed and deliverable commitments to Britain's forgotten car users. Had he done so, I honestly believe he and the Conservatives would have won not by a few hundred thousand votes, but by several million.

High-profile political issues such as the Iraq War, illegal immigration or even the Health Service are hugely important, but they don't impact on the lives of most people, most days of the week. Conversely, traffic congestion, rip-off fuel and other motoring taxes, under-investment in road expenditure, unnecessarily dangerous streets and pavements, over-zealous parking regimes and cynical, money-making speed cameras all eat away at the British people, day by day, hour by hour, minute by minute. Not all Brits, mind. Just the 50 million men, women and children who use cars on a regular basis.

Let's make a conservative (no pun intended) guess and say 34m of that 50m are adults who qualify to vote. Let's make a further assumption that only half these men and women would vote for a new-look, unashamedly motoring-obsessed Conservative party. That, at a stroke, is 17 million votes for the Car Using Conservative (CUC) party - more than New Labour and the Lib Dems got between them across Britain on 5 May.

Mike Rutherford
Article from: Auto Express

In the nicest possible way, Toyota is beginning to scare me. Not content with producing cars which, according to countless owner surveys, are just about the best-built and most reliable in the world, the company is repeatedly proving itself to be more profitable than any of its rivals. Build quality and customer satisfaction levels are both strong and, if anything, are getting stronger.

And the product range isn't in bad shape, either. Put aside upmarket Lexus, funky Scion in America and the budget Daihatsu badges, and Toyota's line-up alone is frighteningly strong. The Prius petrol/electric hybrid is a worthy reigning European Car of the Year, while the Corolla Verso is hugely underestimated, not least because it offers a couple of extra seats cleverly hidden in the boot, something many rivals lack. And with apologies to the new Jeep Grand Cherokee and Range Rover Sport, the revised Land Cruiser is the most capable 4x4 I've driven in the last six months.

When you study the Toyota range in all its glory, it is arguably more comprehensive than any other available in Britain. There's three sizes of SUV, a little sports car and a coupé, plus large and mid-sized seven-seater MPVs. There's also a fleet of saloons, estates, hatchbacks and superminis. But now the cute Aygo city car provides the icing on the cake, enabling Toyota to call itself the most complete mass car producer on the planet.

So what if the 1.0-litre city car is made by workers in the Czech Republic? If first impressions are anything to go by, it's built to the Japanese firm's exacting standards. A basic Aygo is capable of nearly 100mph, more than 60mpg and will cost between £6,500 and £7,000 - considerably less than some versions of the justifiably deleted Indian-made CityRover. A Toyota of this quality for this money is nothing short of astonishing.

In the same week that I drove my first Aygo, I also spent a couple of days in Germany with the new 177bhp Avensis, which happily cruises, with Lexus-like refinement, at around 135mph. Toyota's new sports model, you enquire? No, it's the D-CAT (Diesel Clean Advanced Technology) version, which manages nearly 50mpg in everyday conditions. And don't assume the hi-tech, self-proclaimed "cleanest diesel in the world" is expensive to maintain. Toyota says the car needs no more than 4.2 hours in the workshop during the first five years of its life. I'm amazed Jaguar was daft enough to allow Toyota to come up with the D-CAT name - the firm even cheekily chose Jag racing green for the badge.

I'm impressed by the way Toyota is conducting itself these days. Its awesome new diesel may be made in Poland, but the Avensis is still built in Burnaston, Derbyshire. The Midlands used to be MG Rover's manor, but Toyota can now claim the historic car-producing region as its own. It's already employing hundreds of British workers to produce thousands of British-made vehicles a year. Long may it continue.


Mike Rutherford
Article from: Auto Express

Well the Japs are super good at management and cutting costs etc. Their business methods are 2nd to none. However, they also provide quality products and their vehicles are very good quality for the price range they cater to. The days of the crap jap toyota are now gone and they are established as a leading manufacturer.

BUT, Holdens are still better quality and a better product. They just cater to a different market, thats all.

, but toyotas don't seems to handle being driven in the high rev range for a long period of time (mainly due to the fact that you shouldn't drive them this way).

It was a service car for a telecoms company. It was for sale at the auctions one day. It was a VN model.  Those engines are made by Nissan anyway

The launch of the Automotive Technician Accreditation (ATA) scheme is hardly the most mouth-watering development in the motoring world. But it is significant and long overdue. Designed to, among other things, recognise individuals with proven technical competence, it will raise the standards of car maintenance and improve consumer confidence in garages. If ever a sector of the industry needed to polish up its act, it's the oily one.

The big problem for customers is that we know nothing of the credentials of the mechanics who will be working on our vehicles. How much experience do these people have? Do they really care about what they do for a living?

As a result of the ATA scheme, we'll gain a valuable insight into the talentsand attitudes of those we let loose on our cars. Before a technician can become ATA-registered, he or she will be assessed, graded, photographed and charged a £50 fee. There's also a £40 annual charge and the accreditation needs to be renewed after five years. These are not huge sums, but anyone willing to sit the test and put their hand in their pocket is making a very positive statement about their commitment.

Staff will wear badges reading 'service maintenance technician', 'diagnostic technician' or 'master technician'. I'd like to think that their mugshots along with a description of their skills will be displayed in garage receptions. Customers should be able to arrange for ATA-certified experts to work on specific problems and sign off the car when mended. Fine, state-of-the-art machinery needs professionals to look after it.

Such people should get pay rises for their achievements; I for one would be happy to fork out a little extra for a service if I knew it was carried out by an accredited master technician, rather than a non-accredited grease monkey.

Mechanics will be tested on air-conditioning, brakes, customer liaison, engine electrics, engines, instructional support (any idea, anyone?), supplementary restraint systems (such as airbags), transmissions, electrics, safety and documentation, and wheel alignment/steering. But what about tyres, bodywork, entertainment systems and on-board computers? I'd like to add driving skills to this list, on the grounds that if a mechanic is road-testing my car after working on it, I'd like to know he's capable behind the wheel. Cleanliness is another area of concern, since many of us have taken immaculate vehicles into garages and got them back with oil stains on the trim.

These issues need to be addressed, but the Institute of the Motor Industry should be congratulated for getting the new scheme up and running. Next time I take one of my motors in, I'll be asking for it to be looked after by an ATA-approved person. If there are none on the premises, I'll take my business elsewhere. I suggest you do the same.

Mike Rutherford
Article from: Auto Express

by Mike Rutherford

There are no plans for the mandatory introduction of speed limiters in privately owned vehicles, the Government claims. But why, then, is it spending millions of pounds testing 20 partly remote-control cars that use satellite technology to automatically apply the brakes if you are going too fast?

Personal mobility machines that can drive themselves are nothing new. In the early Nineties, Toyota took me to a top-secret test facility at the foot of Mount Fuji in Japan, where I was treated to a demonstration from a family saloon which did just that. Later, Honda allowed me to travel in the passenger seat of one of its autopilot cars while it did a few high-speed laps on a race track. It maintained a seemingly perfect line around the circuit, veering off course only when obstacles were put in its path.

As two of the world's most innovative car makers, I can well understand why Toyota and Honda are developing autopilot models. But I can't work out why two of the least impressive organisations, the current Government and Department for Transport, are spending large sums of our cash on this technology. Do they even know that Toyota and Honda have already done real-world trials and have at least two decades' worth of experience on the subject? Apparently not, as the vehicles being tested in Britain are from Skoda, a firm renowned for value for money, not technical breakthroughs.

When Toyota and Honda lead the world and start putting inevitably expensive autopilot cars on sale, they'll be brilliant for those who want them. But I fear the ultimate aim of the Government and DfT is to eventually force all of us to have this technology, or at least a limited version of it, on board. Our 'leaders' won't mind us starting, steering, parking and doing a bit of braking ourselves, but they will want to remotely restrict the speeds we do. At this early stage of the game, it seems the 20 Skodas on test here are having their accelerators remotely disengaged or their brakes applied the moment the 'driver' creeps over the official maximum speed. This is regardless of how inappropriate or potentially dangerous some of those ill-thought out limits are.

There's a worrying pattern emerging here. Black boxes are already in some cars, tracking their every move. Next they'll be used for countrywide congestion charging and possibly even workplace taxation purposes. The DfT has already expressed enthusiasm in effectively fining drivers whose employers provide a free place for them to park. After that the big brother-style, spy-in-the-car boxes will aid the introduction of road charging of up to £1.34 per mile. Then with a little additional software forcibly installed at huge personal expense to us, our brakes will eventually be applied and our accelerator pedals killed whenever car-loathing Transport Secretary Alistair Darling, or his replacement, dictates they should be. Motorists be afraid. Be very afraid!

Article from: Auto Express

Before I touch on the most sensitive and upsetting transport-related issue imaginable, let's get a few things straight. Politicians can't be blamed for the bombings on London's road and railway networks earlier this month. Neither can the police, nor the public transport management or workers. The blame lies entirely with cowardly, murderous terrorists.

These maniacs have switched from high-security aeroplanes to zero-security buses and trains, as recent events in Tel Aviv, Madrid and now London have shown. And it hurts me to say that as long as unknown, unnamed and unchecked passengers are allowed to casually jump on and off inner-city public transport with ease, lethal attacks may well continue. People on trains and buses are perfect soft targets for terrorists, not to mention muggers, sex offenders, gangs, drunks and drug addicts.

It seems bizarre that an innocent passenger with a passport will have a pair of nail clippers confiscated before getting on a flying public transport vehicle. Yet those with no ID can easily board buses, coaches, trains and trams with knives, guns and even bombs. Hardly anybody in authority is looking at these people, never mind hunting them down.

And that's partly because so much of the tracking technology is being directed towards innocent people in private motor cars. Ironically, in central London, they are actually spied on 24 hours a day as part of the £40-a-week congestion charge.

Motorists who commit the most trivial misdemeanors have been officially described by the Government as "criminals". Meanwhile, London Mayor Ken Livingstone has called people who drive SUVs in town "idiots" - even though this isn't against the law.

London and other UK cities need to train their hi-tech spying devices in the direction of the real terrorists and their potential targets - bus stops, buses, stations and trains. Revenue-obsessed parking attendants, the police and local authorities currently concentrate too heavily on "crimes" such as cars overrunning their time on meters, drivers going 3mph over the limit or motorists paying their congestion tax five minutes late.

Let's re-deploy these so-called civil servants to more worthwhile duties with a security bias rather than a cynical money-making one. Put them on buses and trains to carry out spot-checks and personal searches. Give them sniffer dogs. Teach them advanced first-aid. Let them help people on the move, rather than hinder them as they do now.

In Britain, and London in particular, those in power are barking up the wrong tree. There's an army of uniformed and plain-clothed state-sponsored soldiers of fortune waging war against largely innocent motorists. Meanwhile, bomb-carrying terrorists are getting away with mass murder on the buses and trains. And they will continue to do so unless the cameras and law enforcers concentrate on the real bad guys. It's a question of priorities - and under-attack Britain has currently got them all wrong.

Mike Rutherford
Article from: Auto Express

As a rule, cars have got massively better in the last few decades. I've been lucky enough to drive thousands over the years, and there is no doubt that improvements in performance, safety, exterior design, build quality, reliability, comfort and fuel efficiency have been colossal. However, when it comes to interiors, progress has been somewhat slower.

Most normal cars offer five seats. Anyone who needs more has been limited to vans with windows (MPVs), hearse-like wagons (estates) or boxy trucks (4x4s). But now, thanks to the Japanese, buyers wanting extra accommodation have another solution; sleek looking six or seven-seat cars. And their arrival is contributing to the slow death of the traditional family hatch which, due to its lack of flexibility, has had its day. These tired old driver-plus-four mobiles will limp on for many years, but wouldn't you prefer up to 40 per cent more chairs in an equivalent-sized model for little extra cash?

Honda's FR-V, with its two rows of three-abreast seating, is brilliant. I know this arrangement is available on the Multipla, but the Fiat is a van, not a car. Meanwhile, the Toyota Corolla Verso's set-up of five chairs, plus two hidden in the floor, is cleverer still. Yes, the Vauxhall Zafira came up with this idea first, but again it's a van!

And now another Japanese maker is getting in on the act of providing clever seating in a proper car-like body. Mazda has just launched the 5, and its interior is the cleverest of the lot. It uses a combination of two conventional seats in the front and two foldaway items in the rear. But the best bit is that in a few easy moves, the central bench can be changed from a three-seater sofa to two separate armchairs. What's more, each row is arranged theatre-style, which means passengers look over the heads of those in front and get a clear view of the road ahead. Sure the Land Rover Discovery has this feature, where it's called stadium seating, but it's an expensive truck, not a car.

The Mazda also boasts another great idea the 4x4 doesn't have - sliding rear doors. These are excellent in tight parking spots, but notoriously expensive to install. Despite this, the Mazda 5 starts at a shade over £14,000 or, if you prefer, around £2,000 a seat.

Most people can't afford to spend a fortune on a long-wheelbase Land Rover or an ugly, conventional minibus/MPV such as the Chrysler Voyager. But now, thanks to the Japanese, you can have a proper, surprisingly compact car with six permanent seats in the case of the Honda, or five plus two in the Toyota and four or five plus two in the new Mazda. How models such as the Ford C-MAX, Renault Scenic or Citroen Picasso continue to compete when they're offering fewer chairs for not much less money I don't know. It's my prediction the traditional five-seater family hatch will eventually be superseded by the six, the seven or even the eight-seater family hatch.

Mike Rutherford
Article from: Auto Express

If you believe that Longbridge's problems are finally over, think again. Sure, the administrator has sold the assets of the defunct MG Rover Group and its engine producer Powertrain to Nanjing from China. But breathing a sigh of relief and assuming that this particular industrial debacle in the West Midlands is over is a bit like pretending that Jenson Button is a winning Formula One driver.

The allegation is that administrator PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PWC) "discriminated" against Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation (SAIC) when it accepted the measly £50million rival offer for the collapsed MG Rover/Powertrain empire from Nanjing. Fed-up corporate fixer and entrepreneur David James is, understandably, causing further ripples by claiming his bid was £15million higher than Nanjing's. The UK unions don't believe at this early stage that the Nanjing bid is best for British employees, either, and that could lead to industrial action, which is the last thing that's needed.

And the icing on the cake is that one of the world's most talented car men - former Mazda Japan, Ford Europe and Maserati boss Martin Leach, who teamed up with SAIC - has effectively been blown out of the water by the administrator, too. This has robbed MG Rover and Powertrain of the credible frontman it desperately needs.

Close examination of recent, carefully worded statements from PWC fill me with little confidence. On 15 April, the firm said: "Very significant funding would be required to sustain the [MG Rover/Powertrain] business as a going concern."

And even now, after the sale, there remains little or no evidence that Nanjing, or indeed the failed bidders, are prepared to commit money of any significance. On 29 April, PWC worryingly concluded: "It will not be viable for [Powertrain] production to recommence." Roll forward to 20 May, and the official word was there was only an "outside possibility that car production could restart at Longbridge".

And even on 22 July, when MG Rover and Powertrain were sold to Nanjing, PWC cautiously confessed the Chinese firm has "indicated its intention to relocate the engine plant and some car production to China" and to retain "some in the UK". Significantly and cleverly, this is not the same as saying the Chinese firm will definitely build cars and pay factory workers the going rate here.

But why would it? Nanjing can hire workers in China at a fraction of the cost, thanks to massively lower labour rates, longer working hours and considerably less, if any, union clout. Personally, I'm suspicious about Nanjing's motivation and its sketchy plans for the years ahead. And I'm equally doubtful about Longbridge's future as a car producing venue for its new owner. It's almost as if the Midlands plant and the Rover name have become jinxed. For once, I actually hope to be proved wrong.

Mike Rutherford
Article from: Auto Express