There has to be something in this. I think that many single breadwinner households would like to own both a large and a small car but are prevented by financing and rego costs which would dwarf fuel savings. It would help if micro-cars had their own special truck-free lanes. If the soccer mom or the bushbasher has to drive a behemoth then maybe it should be painted in camouflage stripes or speed limited to 100 kph. If the cops catch you going any faster you'll need a good explanation.

Ideally public transport should be such that each household should only need one small car. If they need something bigger they could hire it, leaving the small car parked with the hire firm.

Stick around, Valerie, we need you.

There are currently no small cars at all made in Australia. “Australian” (branches of foreign firms) manufacturers have missed the boat, and are now unlikely to get on. There are rumbles of no car manufacturing in Australia.

Serve them right. The writing has been on the wall for many years, as buyers went for more economic vehicles. And, there are the customers who stubbornly stick to big vehicles.

Although the demand for smaller vehicles by erstwhile six cylinder passenger sedan drivers has increased, the demand for the grossest, most unnecessary conveyances – the 4WD’s - has actually INCREASED.

There were rumours that Ford would produce the Focus here. Two days ago it was announced that the Focus would be produced in Mexico.

And, hey. What does Ms. Yule thinks she is up to encouraging people to even have a ‘second car’? How many families really need more than one car? I’ve been driving for 50 years, my wife a few years less; we have managed with one vehicle, despite being treated by multiple car-owners as a bit odd.

The Indian car referred to by the author was recently reported as being the filthiest little thing (environmental-wise) imaginable. To get it up to scratch environmentally would certainly up that seemingly attractive price.

The Smart car, already available, seems to be the closest to Valerie Yule’s requirements that we will see for a long time yet. They haven’t been taken to by consumers – anyone who looks at them must imagine two squashed occupants at a glance – and the traffic conditions Ms. Yule envisages, which might make them safer, will never apply.

It is up to drivers to have fewer cars per household, and cut back on their usage. In cities, the people who drive to work and leave their cars parked all day could solve all of the problems by using public transport.

The keyword is lifestyle; not a type of a “second car”.

We do wish, act and think habitually the most of the time. And to change our lifestyles requires a complete reversal of our values, acts and thoughts.

Sydney, for example, is vast city wasting a lot of energy to run. Everybody wants to have a house and a car to drive to work. Without a car life can be difficult in Sydney and a dream of a house could stay just a dream.

As a one trying to change my lifestyle, I have to point out how difficult it is to swim against the tide. And I’m lucky to live within walking distance of two major shopping centres. Regular shopping in corner shops would be financially crippling.

People will continue to waste and pollute until something hits them back hard. What that will be might be a question of preferences, but tax does seem a better option.

Is there any "case" here for an Australian small (or should we say "micro") car? For any model to be viably built here there has to be not only a local market, but an export market as well (which partly explains why Holden's Commodore has done better than Ford's Falcon). The Tata Nano, if previous Tata models are anything to go by, would be an unreliable piece of junk. 5l per 100kms might sound fabulous, but many "normal" sized petrol cars come close to this, while modern diesels are very close, far greater comfort and safety.

Valerie's piece seems like yet another excuse to get 4wds off the road and further reduce speed limits, just so motorised skateboards would be more readily accepted. While I agree that far too many city slickers own 4wds for no valid reason, simple economics will ensure that mums will look towards more sensible, less "power and image enhancing" vehicles for school duties. Given the increasingly larger posteriors on both men and women these days, perhaps they could even think of walking to school to escort the little ones home! That way they could avoid the madness and mayhem of the school pickup areana... but I digress.

One reason small cars have not been as popular in this country as in others is that few are built for Australian frames. As a tall fellow myself, even medium-sized cars have presented problems, although this is improving. "Micro" cars like the Nano are worse again. It would be interesting to see what saftey rating the Nano achieves too, given that Euro and Japanese cars commonly rate at least 4 stars in crash testing. A recently tested Chinese car (not a small car like the Nano) achieved precisely zero stars in European tests.

It would seem more sensible, at least in the short term (and we are talking medium-long term anyway, "gearing up" to produce a small car here) to encourage car-pooling. Much better four workmates in comfort and safety in a Commodore than a lone commuter in a tiny putt-putt with barely spare room for their lunch.

I am bemused by articles like this. Effectively what the author is saying is that if the cars were built the buyers would come.

Really? The people whose business is to selling cars live or die by how well they forecast people's preferences - just ask Mitsubishi. I don't think its likely that have got it badly wrong, or will do so in the future.

What I suspect the author is really trying to do is entice people buy smaller, more efficient cars. You don't do that by building manufacturing plants. Giving tax benefits to smaller cars would work. Raising petrol prices might have an effect. Building lots of cars and sending their manufacturers broke - I don't think so.