Aston boss slams government policy on EVS and Brexit
ASTON MARTIN CEO Andy Palmer has described the government’s strategy for Brexit as “laughable”, its Ev-focused policy as “nonsensical” and the idea of full autonomy reaching reality in his lifetime as “absurd”.
Speaking at last week’s Driving the Future event in London, Palmer also said the certainty of a no-deal Brexit is preferable to the current uncertainty of negotiations with no clear outcome – even if the latter offered the prospect of better business conditions in the long term.
“Every time we have to prepare to leave, it ties up working capital and brains on something that may or may not happen,” he said. “The car industry has proved itself very adaptable, but the issue with Brexit is we don’t yet know what problem we are trying to solve.
“First and foremost, I think we now need certainty. I think business was pretty clear that it would prefer a deal with free trade with Europe and it is true we are looking at a cliff edge without one, but at this stage, a decision is better than no decision.
“It’s not great, but we have modelled no deal and run the scenarios. It’s very hard to work with goalposts that move every six months. We need an outcome and the truth is that we have debated our negotiating tactics in public, while the EU 27 have worked with consensus and executed their negotiations brilliantly. Our Brexit strategy has been laughable.”
Palmer also hit out at the government’s singular view that electrification is the answer to all transport environmental issues.
“EV is one route. It is not a panacea. The bit that annoys me is when they try to pick a technological winner,” said Palmer. “The UK is saying it wants to be a leader in electric vehicle technology but the truth is that nobody knows what the right technology is for 20 to 30 years’ time.
“Politicians can’t be taken seriously if they talk about 30 to 40 years ahead. They know they won’t have accountability then.
“Government should identify problems and set policy. The engineers should define the solutions. I am pretty sure that 40 years from now, there will be new solutions beyond EVS to consider. Why not synthetic fuels that are carbon neutral? Or where will hydrogen fit in?
“If reducing CO2 is the goal, then diesel is a good solution. If it’s improving air quality, then perhaps not. But which is it? They are trying to bet on
technology that they don’t understand.”
Palmer also suggested the government’s often stated goal of establishing the UK as a leader in battery technology is “nonsensical”, given the funding it has put up is far lower than that of rivals.
“We can’t be a leader with the way we are approaching it currently,” he said. “At Nissan [where Palmer worked before joining Aston], we spent in the region of $4 billion establishing the Leaf; in Europe, they are putting up €7.5bn; in Asia, they have been working on it for 15 years; and in the UK, we have pledged £750 million. How can we compete with the world with that?
“If that is the budget, then we should pick a technological winner and put everything behind it rather than try to play catch-up.”
Palmer also talked down the idea that full autonomy would be widespread in his lifetime.
“Unless it is in a geofenced area, then you are not going to get full autonomy in the way many people are describing it,” he said. “The idea of full autonomy being widespread in my lifetime is absurd. Full level five systems are a moonshot.”