J
Just Zis Guy
Guest
Article from the Grauniad <http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,839484,00.html> about
Gwyneth Dunwoody standing up to the Provisional ABD.
Who dares to stand up to the motorists?
Catherine Bennett Thursday November 14, 2002 The Guardian
As the BBC's Great Britons publicity stunt is reminding us, ideas about what constitutes greatness
vary from age to age, year to year, even from week to week. Some of those who have voted for
Princess Diana may already want to rethink on account of her poor taste in jokes, something newly
revealed by a palace custard-maker. Others may feel that any favourite of Michael Portillo's must
necessarily forfeit all claims to greatness, even if she happens to be Queen Elizabeth I. As for me,
I can hardly take seriously a list that does not feature my own current idol, Gwyneth Dunwoody.
True, the chairman of the Select Committee on Transport, Local Government and the Regions has not,
like Diana (currently number two), done much for the House of Versace. And at this stage in her
career she seems unlikely, like Michael Crawford (number 17), to make her mark in Andrew Lloyd
Webber's Phantom of the Opera. Instead, Dunwoody now fills the infinitely more testing role of being
the only person in the government prepared to stand up to motorists.
For this, as you might imagine, she receives few thanks. "I am used to receiving letters that refer
to me as an antisocial old socialist ***** - and to that I might even plead guilty," she said,
opening a Commons debate on speed last month. "I see no reason to discount any such gentle
descriptions of my character." Many of the letters, she went on, were intensely personal "in that
they argued that as we must have cars, we must be able to drive them as fast as we like and, in many
instances, we must not comply with the more irritating rules of the road, the deliberate purpose of
which is to restrict the motorist".
Unlike Dunwoody, who recently evaded a government attempt to evict her from the select committee,
these dashing drivers and their friends in the media are terrifically popular with the government.
Last year it all but apologised for spoiling their fun. The motoring lobby had been protesting, like
so many schoolboys banned from baking their conkers, that concealed speed cameras were a rotten
swizz. Or, as the AA put it, "unfair". The Sun said they were "sneaky". They did not, drivers
complained, give them a "sporting chance" of slowing down, before speeding off again. Presumably
agreeing that the roads are not so much a public highway as a giant obstacle race, in which speed
controls are merely a challenge that any feisty libertarian will find it a positive pleasure to
overcome, the government agreed that speed cameras should be painted bright yellow, to give
motorists a chance to outwit them. The Sun newspaper congratulated itself on a job well done. That
old killjoy, Dunwoody, on the other hand, pointed out that householders do not, in a similarly
sporting spirit, place notices reading, "'If you burgle here, you will be in a certain amount of
difficulty'. We assume that people know that they will be in trouble if they break the law." The
pressure group, Transport 2000 is now seeking a judicial review of the government's decision,
claiming that it "just migrates crashes from one place to another". And at transport conference this
week, a senior Thames Valley police officer also called for the government to reconsider, pointing
out that, "This is not a game. A sense of fair play should not get into this."
And, thanks to the government and the motoring lobby, a sense of fair play never does prevail. The
car always wins. British pedestrians, particularly child pedestrians, may be the ones who suffer
most from inadequate speed management: their death rate here is one of the worst in Europe.
But it is British motorists who represent themselves as uniquely "beleaguered" or "hard-pressed" -
albeit, living - victims of oppressive transport policies. Why, they say, some loony green
extremists even claim that cars damage the environment, a charge that is indignantly refuted on the
website of the Association of British Drivers. "Is man-made global warming proved?" it demands; "The
answer is a resounding 'no'". Which makes it all the more unfair, it goes on, that "Man-made global
warming, albeit non-existent, has been seized on by politicians to justify anti-car policies from
high fuel duty to road tax schemes and all points in-between."
But, credit where it's due, New Labour politicians are different. As Dunwoody's committee pointed
out in June, when it recommended much tougher deterrents to speeding, Blair is terrified of seeming
anti-car. The suspicions of Tory voters having been allayed, it is the unofficial, but more
threatening party of motorists who must now be cajoled and reassured.
Last month, with the government still sticking up for the officially-customised, distinctly
avoidable speed camera, Dunwoody once again pointed out the curious way in which deaths on the road
- 3,450 last year - seem, somehow, to strike the public as less significant than other kinds of
transport fatalities, the 32 deaths on the railways last year, for example. "It is," she said, "as
if the great hand of God has fallen on them to bring down some well-deserved punishment... "
Whereas, as any half-way sporting motorist could tell you, it's just that the best man won.
Gwyneth Dunwoody standing up to the Provisional ABD.
Who dares to stand up to the motorists?
Catherine Bennett Thursday November 14, 2002 The Guardian
As the BBC's Great Britons publicity stunt is reminding us, ideas about what constitutes greatness
vary from age to age, year to year, even from week to week. Some of those who have voted for
Princess Diana may already want to rethink on account of her poor taste in jokes, something newly
revealed by a palace custard-maker. Others may feel that any favourite of Michael Portillo's must
necessarily forfeit all claims to greatness, even if she happens to be Queen Elizabeth I. As for me,
I can hardly take seriously a list that does not feature my own current idol, Gwyneth Dunwoody.
True, the chairman of the Select Committee on Transport, Local Government and the Regions has not,
like Diana (currently number two), done much for the House of Versace. And at this stage in her
career she seems unlikely, like Michael Crawford (number 17), to make her mark in Andrew Lloyd
Webber's Phantom of the Opera. Instead, Dunwoody now fills the infinitely more testing role of being
the only person in the government prepared to stand up to motorists.
For this, as you might imagine, she receives few thanks. "I am used to receiving letters that refer
to me as an antisocial old socialist ***** - and to that I might even plead guilty," she said,
opening a Commons debate on speed last month. "I see no reason to discount any such gentle
descriptions of my character." Many of the letters, she went on, were intensely personal "in that
they argued that as we must have cars, we must be able to drive them as fast as we like and, in many
instances, we must not comply with the more irritating rules of the road, the deliberate purpose of
which is to restrict the motorist".
Unlike Dunwoody, who recently evaded a government attempt to evict her from the select committee,
these dashing drivers and their friends in the media are terrifically popular with the government.
Last year it all but apologised for spoiling their fun. The motoring lobby had been protesting, like
so many schoolboys banned from baking their conkers, that concealed speed cameras were a rotten
swizz. Or, as the AA put it, "unfair". The Sun said they were "sneaky". They did not, drivers
complained, give them a "sporting chance" of slowing down, before speeding off again. Presumably
agreeing that the roads are not so much a public highway as a giant obstacle race, in which speed
controls are merely a challenge that any feisty libertarian will find it a positive pleasure to
overcome, the government agreed that speed cameras should be painted bright yellow, to give
motorists a chance to outwit them. The Sun newspaper congratulated itself on a job well done. That
old killjoy, Dunwoody, on the other hand, pointed out that householders do not, in a similarly
sporting spirit, place notices reading, "'If you burgle here, you will be in a certain amount of
difficulty'. We assume that people know that they will be in trouble if they break the law." The
pressure group, Transport 2000 is now seeking a judicial review of the government's decision,
claiming that it "just migrates crashes from one place to another". And at transport conference this
week, a senior Thames Valley police officer also called for the government to reconsider, pointing
out that, "This is not a game. A sense of fair play should not get into this."
And, thanks to the government and the motoring lobby, a sense of fair play never does prevail. The
car always wins. British pedestrians, particularly child pedestrians, may be the ones who suffer
most from inadequate speed management: their death rate here is one of the worst in Europe.
But it is British motorists who represent themselves as uniquely "beleaguered" or "hard-pressed" -
albeit, living - victims of oppressive transport policies. Why, they say, some loony green
extremists even claim that cars damage the environment, a charge that is indignantly refuted on the
website of the Association of British Drivers. "Is man-made global warming proved?" it demands; "The
answer is a resounding 'no'". Which makes it all the more unfair, it goes on, that "Man-made global
warming, albeit non-existent, has been seized on by politicians to justify anti-car policies from
high fuel duty to road tax schemes and all points in-between."
But, credit where it's due, New Labour politicians are different. As Dunwoody's committee pointed
out in June, when it recommended much tougher deterrents to speeding, Blair is terrified of seeming
anti-car. The suspicions of Tory voters having been allayed, it is the unofficial, but more
threatening party of motorists who must now be cajoled and reassured.
Last month, with the government still sticking up for the officially-customised, distinctly
avoidable speed camera, Dunwoody once again pointed out the curious way in which deaths on the road
- 3,450 last year - seem, somehow, to strike the public as less significant than other kinds of
transport fatalities, the 32 deaths on the railways last year, for example. "It is," she said, "as
if the great hand of God has fallen on them to bring down some well-deserved punishment... "
Whereas, as any half-way sporting motorist could tell you, it's just that the best man won.