Labour councillors in Brighton and Hove have pledged to punish drivers of gas guzzling cars by making them pay double for their residents' parking permits.

The scheme would make Brighton and Hove the first city outside London to hit motorists with extra charges for driving 4x4s and people carriers.

Politicians say they want to stop school-run mums blocking roads and cut down on people who drive their people carriers to the corner shop.

But are the proposals just another way of taxing Brighton and Hove's residents?

Cordelia O'Neill meets two campaigners with very different views.

YES

  • Tony Bosworth, Chief campaigner on transport issues for Greenpeace.

Transport is one of the fastest growing reasons behind carbon emissions starting to rise and gas guzzlers are a big part of the problem.

One of the easiest ways to tackle the problem is for people to start buying more fuel-efficient cars.

Yes, there are people who use off-road vehicles on farms or in the country who really need them but the only time most "Chelsea tractor" drivers take their cars off-road is when they park them on the pavement.

No one needs a 4x4 to go to the shops. It's unnecessary and unjustifiable.

Of course people have the right to drive whatever car they choose but councils should be doing more to make sure they choose more responsibly.

I don't think the new charges go far enough. It isn't just 4x4s causing the problems.

Sports cars, people carriers and saloon cars are terrible for pollution and they aren't being covered by the measures.

Big cars don't just pollute the environment, they cause problems for pedestrians and cyclists as well.

People say they're safer for mothers driving their children to school but if you happen to get hit by one you're going to be significantly worse off than if you get hit by a mini.

The evidence suggests people might feel safer if they drive a gas guzzler but they aren't much safer to drive than any other car.

I support what the councils are trying to do. People have to be encouraged to buy more fuel-efficient cars but the real power lies with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who should be putting up road tax for gas guzzling vehicles.

Charging people who drive cars that produce a lot of carbon emissions means councils can ring-fence money to put into improving public transport.

But it has to be clear that the extra revenue will go into making it easier to be environmentally-friendly or people will start to kick back against the measures.

The proposals make sense. The bigger the car, the bigger the engine and the bigger the ecological footprint left behind.

Hitting people in their wallets might seem tough but it's needed to make people think about their actions and change the way they behave. The polluters really do have to pay for the damage they do.

NO

  • Sheila Rainger, campaign manager for the RAC Foundation, which is opposing the plans.

People need to be treated like adults. They know what they need and what suits them. Hitting them with another form of tax will just make 4x4 drivers angry.

There's so much unfairness in the way drivers of larger cars are treated by the Government.

If you have a big family, then you need a big car. It's as simple as that. Brighton is a young town with a lot of young families who will be badly affected by measures like this.

Although I'm all for reducing carbon emissions, I have reservations about this particular method. It doesn't make sense to me.

Surely it's quite problematic to charge people for parking an SUV? A car isn't polluting when it's parked.

A lot of people need their 4x4s. They do exist for a reason. Self-employed people like plumbers need them to get around with all their tools, for instance.

My dad is getting on a bit and has a bigger car because of mobility problems.

Their size makes it easier for him to get in and out. It's intrinsically unfair to start punishing them because of one or two irresponsible school-run mums. Gordon Brown's decision to impose higher taxes on band G engines is also problematic. The band is set at 225g of carbon dioxide emitted for every kilometre travelled but that band doesn't just hold all the SUVs and off-road vehicles. It catches a lot of family cars, like Vauxhall Zafiras and Mondeo Estates, as well.

The bands only apply to cars made since 2001 but older cars tend to be more polluting than new models.

It's another example of unfairness. People who drive older cars that give off more carbon pay less than people who have bought newer, more fuel-efficient models.

Whacking someone with another bill isn't the way to deal with carbon emissions.

It's a blunt instrument.

I think we need to work on educating and informing people, not just taking money out of their pockets.

People can make their own decisions but they might need guidance about different cars on the market.

It's often difficult to understand the link between the size of a car's engine and the way it contributes to an increase in carbon emissions.

There are a lot of larger cars that produce less pollution than a traditional 4x4, for example. Giving people clearer information about the car they buy and eco-friendly alternatives will work out a lot more effective than just asking motorists for more money.

What do you think? Add your comments below.