Uber ‘ready to launch' driverless cars in UK

Uber is ready to launch driverless taxis across the UK 's streets despite their approval being pushed back another two years.
Andrew Macdonald, Uber mobility senior vice president, told the BBC the taxi company's autonomous vehicles would be on Britain's roads as soon as possible.
Fully autonomous cars were set to be on the roads by 2026 but the new government has pushed that date back to mid 2027.
"We're ready to launch robotaxis in the UK as soon as the regulatory environment is ready for us," Mr Macdonald told the BBC.
In the US, he said robotaxis typically operate for 20 hours per day, seven days per week, and was working with 18 automated car tech companies to bring them to the UK.
Driverless taxis are also already in operation in China, the UAE and Singapore. Mr Macdonald said the UK was not lagging behind, and it only made sense for the technology to exist where it has been developed.
The previous Conservative government said the technology would be approved by 2026 with former transport secretary Mark Harper travelling in a Wayve self-driving vehicle.
But the Labour government has now said this will be 2027 as it 'explores options for short-term trials' in the meantime.
There are concerns around insurance, ownership and liability when a self-driving vehicle is involved in an accident, according to the BBC.
In the US, General Motors stopped its driverless taxi service in San Francisco over safety concerns. 'The reality is that one accident is too many,' Mr Macdonald added.
"That said, with EV (electric vehicles), human drivers… we operate in the real world and stuff happens,' Mr Macdonald said.
In January, a video of a man trapped inside a Robotaxi doing circles around an airport carpark in Arizona went viral.
A Department for Transport spokesperson told the BBC: 'We are working quickly and will implement self-driving vehicle legislation in the second half of 2027.
'We are also exploring options for short-term trials and pilots to create the right conditions for a thriving self-driving sector.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

The Independent

25 minutes ago

• The Independent

As Musk's 'robotaxi' rollout approaches, Democratic lawmakers in Texas try to throw up a roadblock

A group of Democratic lawmakers in Texas is asking Elon Musk to delay the planned rollout of driverless 'robotaxis' in the state this weekend to assure that the vehicles are safe. In a letter, seven state legislators asked Tesla to wait until September when a new law takes effect that will require several checks before autonomous vehicles can be deployed without a human in the driver's seat. Tesla is slated to begin testing a dozen of what it calls robotaxis for paying customers on Sunday in a limited area of Austin, Texas. 'We are formally requesting that Tesla delay autonomous robotaxi operations until the new law takes effect on September 1, 2025,' the letter from Wednesday, June 18, reads. 'We believe this is in the best interest of both public safety and building public trust in Tesla's operations.' It's not clear if the letter will have much impact. Republicans have been a dominant majority in the Texas Legislature for more than 20 years. State lawmakers and Republican Gov. Greg Abbott have generally embraced Musk and the jobs and investment he has brought to Texas, from his SpaceX rocket program on the coast, to his Tesla factory in Austin. The company, which is headquartered in Austin, did not responded immediately to a request for comment from The Associated Press. The law will require companies to secure approval from the state motor vehicles department to operate autonomous cars with passengers. That approval, in turn, would depend on sufficient proof that the cars won't pose a high risk to others if the self-driving system breaks down, among other reassurances. Companies would also have to file detailed plans for how first responders should handle the cars if there is a problem, such as an accident. The letter asked Tesla to assure the legislators it has met all the requirements of the law even if it decides to go ahead with the test run this weekend. The letter was earlier reported by Reuters. Musk has made the robotaxi program a priority at Tesla and a failure would likely be highly damaging to the company's stock, which has already tumbled 20% this year. Musk's political views and his affiliation with the Trump administration have drastically reduced sales of Tesla, particularly in Europe, where Musk's endorsement of Germany's far-right Alternative for Germany party in February's election drew broad condemnation. Tesla shares bottomed out in March and have rebounded somewhat in recent months. Much of the rise reflects optimism that robotaxis will not only be deployed without a hitch, but that the service will quickly expand to other cities and eventually dominate the self-driving cab business. Rival Waymo is already picking up passengers in Austin and several other cities, and recently boasted of surpassing 10 million paid rides. In afternoon trading Friday, Tesla shares were largely unchanged at $320. ________ AP reporter Jim Vertuno contributed from Austin.

Times

29 minutes ago

• Times

Insolvencies rise as firms face tariffs and higher costs

The number of businesses becoming insolvent rose sharply last month as companies faced higher staff costs and continuing uncertainty over trading arrangements with the United States. Business insolvencies in England and Wales rose 15 per cent to 2,238 in May compared with the same month a year ago, according to data from the Insolvency Service. The figures showed that the number of creditors' voluntary liquidations, through which a director chooses to close down the business, rose by 13 per cent to 1,734, while the number of company administrations, which usually involve larger enterprises, was up by 12 per cent to 136. Businesses started paying higher national insurance contributions for employees in April and also faced an increase in the national minimum wage. The corporate environment has also been hit by uncertainty over tariffs, although Britain has now signed a trade deal with the US. Tom Russell, president of R3, the UK's insolvency and restructuring trade body, said the uncertainty over trade costs had made 'medium and long-term planning more difficult' for companies. Mark Ford, partner in the restructuring team at S&W, the professional services firm, said: 'The impact of sluggish economic growth, high borrowing costs, low consumer confidence and high inflation in recent years has eroded cash reserves for businesses and left some in a perilous position. 'Businesses are now facing newer challenges that threaten their viability and this means we are likely to continue to see a steady stream of company insolvencies in the coming months. 'Higher costs resulting from increases to employer national insurance contributions, the minimum wage and business rates are all heaping considerable pressure on businesses, particularly those that feel they are unable to increase prices for fear of losing customers.' Kathleen Garrett, partner at Reed Smith, the law firm, said the Bank of England's decision to hold interest rates on Thursday showed that while borrowing costs were falling, they were facing 'a much more gradual descent than many would have hoped'. She added: 'Businesses are facing a raft of challenges which have caused insolvencies to start rising again. The headwinds from additional business costs such as the recent increases to national insurance and a fraught geopolitical environment in terms of tariffs and unrest appear to have had an effect on business.'

The Independent

30 minutes ago

• The Independent

Why is Angela Rayner shifting the council tax burden from north to south?

When Angela Rayner took over her department, the first thing she did was to delete 'levelling up' from its name. But she insisted that she was committed to the idea behind the phrase, and now she is about to announce a change in local government funding to prove it. The new funding formula is expected to allocate money from central government according to local needs, including population, poverty and age, with extra weighting for rural and coastal areas with higher transport costs. The effect will be to force local councils in London and the home counties to put up council tax. Many of them are expected to increase tax by the maximum 5 per cent a year for several years, and more than before will ask Rayner for permission to hold a local referendum on an increase greater than 5 per cent. Councils in the north, the Midlands and east London, on the other hand, may be able to cut their council tax, or at least increase it by less. Is this fair? Labour argues that the Conservatives have fiddled the funding formula for 14 years, resulting in artificially low council taxes in places such as Westminster and Wandsworth – former Tory councils that attracted disproportionate media coverage in local elections. In the end, this attempt to cook the books could not hold back the electoral tide, and Labour won control of both councils in 2022. Clobbering those councils is going to make it harder for Labour to retain control, so it could be argued that Rayner is motivated purely by wanting to rebalance the national distribution of resources according to need. The new system will probably be fairer than the current one, if not perfectly fair, but any attempt to adjust local government funding throws up winners and losers – and the losers always make more noise than those who quietly pocket their gains. How quickly will the change happen? Even if the change were totally fair in principle, any sharp fall in central government funding and big increase in council tax is likely to cause hardship. That is why Rayner is expected to adjust her new formula by putting a limit on how much any council's income from central government can fall in a year. David Phillips, of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, says: 'It's been 20 years since we've had an effective system to allocate funding between councils so it is out of whack and the changes are going to be big.' That means any changes will probably be phased in over several years. What could possibly go wrong? If Rayner delivers a funding system for local government that is more closely aligned with local needs, she could deliver more radical policy substance than the Conservative slogan of 'levelling up' ever managed. But Phillips points out a philosophical problem. The more the government tries to redistribute resources from 'leafier places' to deprived areas, the more 'it is making a trade-off to prioritise need over incentives for councils to tackle need and grow their council tax base', he says. If councils receive more funding the higher their indicators of deprivation are, there is a danger of perverse incentives for them to keep those indicators high. Shouldn't council tax be revalued from scratch? Of course it should. It is based on notional property values in 1991 (in England; in Wales the reference date is 2003), so it is hopelessly out of date. But revaluation would produce even more dramatic individual winners and losers than changing funding for whole council areas. Rayner's redistribution is already what Sir Humphrey would describe as 'very brave, deputy prime minister'; a full revaluation would be several times braver – in other words, a guaranteed political disaster. The most that is likely to be politically feasible would be to revalue council tax for more expensive properties, such as the one in 20 UK homes currently on the market for more than £1m. A similar policy, called a mansion tax, was considered by the coalition government – George Osborne and the Liberal Democrats wanted it but David Cameron vetoed the idea, saying the Tory party's donors wouldn't wear it. Given that Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, is likely to be looking for new sources of revenue in the autumn Budget, this may be an option. She did rule out a mansion tax before the election, but I don't think it has been mentioned since. Look out for even greater 'fairness'.