The idea behind Kyoto is to reduce the amount of 'greenhouse' gases emitted around the world, primarily carbon-dioxide (CO₂), and thereby combat global warming and reduce the impact on the world's climate. The aim set by the UK Government, which exceeds that of the treaty itself, is to reduce CO₂ output to 12.5% below 1990 levels by 2010, and reach a 20% reduction if possible.

One of the strategies being used the achieve this target is the introduction of cleaner, more efficient vehicles, both for personal transport and also in the road haulage industry. Hence we have the introduction of the new Euro engine emission standards for vehicles, with the latest 'Euro IV' to be introduced in 2008. This is without mentioning VED and duel duty at the highest rates in the EU.

This does indeed seem to be the sensible thing to do if countries in the EU are to meet their obligations under the Kyoto Protocol. After all vehicle usage does make up around 20% of the UK's CO₂ emissions. OK so it will cost the motorist and particularly the road haulage operator money [that they can ill afford], but that's the price we have to pay for a cleaner world. Right?

In that case why is more of the burden not placed on the shoulders of the group of people who contribute around 16% of our CO₂ output, the British householder. The Government is fond of using the phrase "let the polluter pay". OK then, let's do that. We need to distribute more of the cost of meeting our Kyoto obligations across the nation as a whole rather than let road users, especially commercial users, shoulder a dis-proportionate amount of the burden.

A report by Cambridge Econometrics in 1999 pointed out the problem. "…the domestic sector will be the fastest-growing source of energy use. Household emissions will by 2010 have risen 13% on a 1990 baseline, compared with road traffic, which will account for only a 1% rise in emissions."

As householders all, those involved in the road transport industry would still be paying their share, but not at the cost of failed companies and lost jobs. It's easy to single out 'big nasty lorries' for blame because the short-sighted amongst the general public would be happy to see them removed from the road. They must understand that if the road haulage industry cannot prosper, UK plc might as well shut up shop and go home.

Remember the recent report "Life without Lorries" by Professor Alan McKinnon?

"Road freight is the life-blood of the national economy. Without lorries to carry this freight, current standards of living could be maintained for only a few days".