Let's hope this doesn't signal the start of a trend.
Recently, the UK's Transport Select Committee submitted its report, titled "Plugged in Policy?" The report focused on plug-in vehicles, including adoption, charging, and sales. The UK's government officials reviewed "Plugged in Policy?" and arrived at the general conclusion that it's not necessary to establish targets for plug-in vehicle sales and that it's not the duty of government to standardize charging points or otherwise support the growth of plug-in vehicles.
The government arrived at this conclusion despite recommendations to the contrary presented by one of the government's Common Select Committees. The committee suggested that the government explain how it will standardize the plug-in vehicle infrastructure, which in this case includes charging requirements (connectors, locations, fees) and financial incentives for plug-in vehicle buyers.
The government rejected the idea that it should be involved in this process, instead stating "There are advantages to a single recharging plug solution… it is our stance that it is for the market and industry to decide what charging hardware and infrastructure will be."
Furthermore, the report from the Committee suggested that the government establish sales targets to assess the success of plug-in vehicle and to evaluate the impact of the UK's subsidies for plug-in vehicles. In response, the government stated that uncertainty of market penetration of plug-ins prevents a target from being established. If there's no goal, then how can a nation evaluate success?
This back-seat approach and we're-not-involved attitude is not likely to promote growth in the plug-in vehicle segment. If the government of a nation can't stand behind a worthy product, then its residents likely won't either. There's already evidence of this in the UK, where sales of plug-in vehicles are abysmal, but if this hands-off stance were to be adopted by other nations, the consequences would seriously impact the health of the market.
The trick seems to be to get governments involved in things in which they should be involved - like promoting plug-in cars - and keep them out of promoting technologies that make no economic or environmental sense, like nuclear power and fossil fuel development. The US and the world would have a LOT more oil left if the respective governments had not conspired with oil, insurance and auto companies, real estate developers and, needless to say, bankers whose livelihood depends on keeping us all in debt, upon perpetual economic growth, making and buying things we really don't need and future generations can not afford.
That probably includes plug-in cars (PIC) BTW, though the case can be made that if they were only used on an as-needed basis even the convenience of a PIC would be affordable. (So far I have burned 1/10th of a gallon of gas after driving my Volt about 475 miles.) In any event we are going to need the damn things for a few years while we work to correct the mistakes of the last century, i.e. the squandering of a once in a half million year inheritance of fossil fuels by governments conspiring with the 'usual suspects' (see above) to promote employment (really just the ability for money to keep making more money - the usual suspects never miss an opportunity to mechanize, automate or off-shore the jobs which are supposed to be the sole source of livelihood for the rest of us).