Renault Group CEO François Provost has openly challenged Britain’s plans to phase out new gasoline and diesel cars by 2030, calling the idea of banning non-electric vehicles ‘stupid’.

His comments are striking from the head of a manufacturer investing billions in electric mobility, but they reflect Renault’s increasingly pragmatic approach to electrification.

Speaking to The Sunday Times, Provost questioned whether governments should impose fixed deadlines for the disappearance of combustion engines. “There is no good date because it’s stupid to ban non-electric cars. It is stupid,” he said.

His remarks come as the British government reviews its Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV) mandate, which currently requires manufacturers to achieve an 80% share of zero-emission new-car sales by 2030, rising to 100% in 2035.

The UK has committed to ending sales of new purely gasoline- and diesel-powered cars in 2030, although conventional hybrids and plug-in hybrids can continue to be sold until 2035. The government is considering easing the intermediate targets following pressure from car manufacturers.

Provost argues that forcing electrification faster than customers and the market can accommodate risks making new cars less affordable. He also points to the financial pressure on manufacturers, particularly as residual values for electric vehicles remain uncertain.

Not abandoning electric cars

The criticism is remarkable because Renault is one of Europe’s most committed manufacturers of affordable electric vehicles. Its Renault 5, Renault 4, and Twingo form the backbone of a strategy to make electric mobility accessible to a broader public. The group is also investing heavily in European EV manufacturing and next-generation battery technology.

Under its futuREady strategic plan, presented in March, Renault Group intends to launch 36 new models by 2030, including 16 fully electric vehicles in Europe. However, the French manufacturer has abandoned its plan to rely exclusively on battery-electric cars by the end of the decade.

Instead, the Renault brand targets a European sales mix of 50% fully electric and 50% full hybrid vehicles by 2030. Its E-Tech hybrid technology will remain available beyond that date.

For Provost, the distinction is between accelerating electrification and legally forcing customers into a single technology before market conditions are ready.

Britain risks drifting away from Europe

Provost’s comments also have a broader political dimension. The Renault chief wants Britain to align more closely with the European Union’s automotive policies, particularly regarding Chinese imports, environmental requirements, and the proposed Made in Europe industrial framework.

That debate gained momentum last Friday when France and Germany announced a compromise on European automotive legislation.

The agreement envisages more flexibility in the EU’s 2035 emissions targets while offering stronger support for vehicles manufactured in Europe. It also opens the possibility of treating Britain as a trusted industrial partner, subject to conditions.

For British manufacturers, inclusion could be important. The European Union remains a crucial export market for UK-made cars. However, the Franco-German compromise is not yet European legislation and still requires agreement at EU level.

Provost’s position suggests that Renault sees regulatory alignment and industrial competitiveness as increasingly interconnected, rather than treating electrification targets as an isolated environmental issue.

A delicate balancing act

Not everyone shares the industry’s calls for greater flexibility. Environmental organization Transport & Environment (T&E) strongly disagrees. It calls the Franco-German compromise a ‘historic mistake’.

It warns that weakening CO₂ targets could undermine Europe’s EV and battery industries rather than protect them. According to T&E’s modeling, the agreement could reduce the share of electric cars in new EU sales in 2030 from 57% to 43%, slowing investment and potentially strengthening Chinese competitors.

Manufacturers, meanwhile, point to the difficulty of financing electric technology while keeping conventional vehicles affordable and competing with rapidly expanding Chinese brands.

Renault’s approach attempts to reconcile those conflicting pressures. It continues to invest in electric vehicles while keeping hybrids as an important commercial and technological alternative.

Provost’s unusually blunt intervention illustrates how much the automotive debate has shifted. Even manufacturers leading Europe’s electric transition are increasingly questioning whether mandatory deadlines alone can deliver it.