The Ministry of Transport, which is responsible for the New Zealand Vehicle Emissions Screening Programme, has not approved or otherwise indicated a preference for any such testing device. We are concerned that your publication has been mis-informed, and has in turn mis-informed readers. You may wish to clarify this point for your readers in a subsequent issue.

Re the emissions initiative: There is strong evidence about the link between vehicle emissions and health problems such as premature mortality, heart disease, cancer, and respiratory illnesses such as bronchitis and asthma – particularly in children and older people.

We estimate about 400 people die prematurely each year due to harmful vehicle exhaust emissions. And we now know that the cost to the Crown Account to cover the harmful health effects of vehicle emissions is about $442 million a year.

We have revised fuel specifications, leading to the progressive reduction of the sulphur content in diesel fuels, making New Zealand diesel cleaner and bringing it into line with European standards by 2006. And we’re looking to do more to bring biofuels to market.

We now require vehicles entering the country to meet an approved emissions standard when they were manufactured.

These two initiatives ‘cleaner fuel and cleaner cars’ are designed to cut harmful vehicle emissions significantly, in the longer term. Preliminary figures indicate the move to ultra-low sulphur diesel alone will contribute to a 30 percent reduction in premature deaths each year.

In November last year, the Ministry of Transport consulted on its proposals for ‘simple testing’.

Many of you will have made a submission and I thank you for doing so.

Submitters endorsed the aim of reducing the harmful health and environmental effects of vehicle emissions, with conditional support for the Ministry’s proposal, and the following provisos:

That the ‘simple idle test’ for petrol vehicles and the ‘snap acceleration test’ for diesel vehicles identify the worst polluting vehicles;

That real, measurable improvements in air quality and health outcomes result;

That costs to vehicle owners are kept low – and set up costs to the industry are manageable;

That there is flexibility according to vehicle age, type and engine technology, including exemptions; and

That the public and industry are kept informed and given plenty of notice.

In addition to the submissions, we have also received the draft findings from the pilot project. Although the final report will not be available until June, when it comes back from local and international peer review, the early results on the effectiveness of simple testing are clear.

The findings show the ‘idle test’ for petrol vehicles, and the ‘snap acceleration test’ for diesel vehicles, both produce an unacceptable level of false-positive and false-negative results.

Of concern is the relatively high number of vehicles in this sample that would have passed the high-idle test, but are actually high on-road emitters. Also of concern are those who would have been told that their cars needed work, but actually didn’t.

When the preliminary proposal was first conceived, back in 2003, the indications were that the simple test would cost motorists between $4 and $10 per test. Today, the inspection and repair industry tell us the cost would likely to be much higher.

I have concluded that implementing the simple test as proposed across the entire vehicle fleet places too great a burden on motorists and the vehicle industry, without the requisite returns. And?

Therefore, I have decided that the proposed introduction of emissions screening in late 2006 will not now proceed.

We introduced the ‘10-second rule’ in 2001, making it an offence to operate a vehicle producing excessive smoke for longer than 10 seconds.

The Auckland Regional Council, Greater Wellington and others have run a number of very effective campaigns targeting the worst vehicles.

Getting these smoky vehicles off the road and requiring the owners to get the problem sorted out is a matter of enforcement.

To supplement on-road enforcement, I have asked Ministry officials to investigate implementing a visual smoke test as part of the warrant and certificate of fitness check, that takes into account classic vehicles. Such a test would consist of a straightforward, subjective visual smoke test, similar to that used in the UK. Vehicles belching smoke would require repair before a warrant or certificate of fitness could be issued.

I have also asked officials to investigate the more systematic use of remote sensing at the roadside, particularly in urban areas, in conjunction with local government. Again, the goal would be to have vehicles comply with the ‘10-second’ rule.

These two initiatives – visual inspection and remote sensing – would allow us to ‘weed-out’ the worst polluters, at minimal cost, without subjecting the entire vehicle fleet to an intrusive and costly testing regime.

• Restrictions on modifications that reduce the effectiveness of a vehicle’s emissions control system.

• Encouraging government and other fleet managers to purchase low emission vehicles, and the promotion of "Clean Fleet" programmes for truck and bus firms, especially for public transport fleets operating in urban areas.

• Targeting high mileage vehicles, including diesel vehicles and especially those driving in inner-city areas such as buses, taxis, couriers and delivery vehicles, for emissions testing.

• Targeting specific regions with specific air-quality issues including the creation of "low emission zones" in inner cities, and

• Incentives for the removal and disposal of ‘end-of-life’ vehicles from the fleet.

The government remains determined to reduce the harmful health and environmental effects of vehicle exhaust emissions.

Subject to the normal consultation process, we could have the visual test in place in time to meet the late 2006 deadline.

We will look into systematic roadside remote sensing, and there will be a new focus on finding ways to hasten the uptake of ‘clean’ technology vehicles and on encouraging the removal and disposal of ‘end-of-life’ vehicles from the fleet.

I’m optimistic that by working together, being sensitive of each other’s needs, and by keeping an open mind, we can come up with a workable and affordable package of measures that reduce even further the appalling health problems associated with vehicle emissions.

reader reply 050501