Monday, November 12, 2012

Time to start worrying about the London - Brighton run

Rather than try to work out all the details, known and unknown, of the growing Petraeus scandal, this blog will turn to matters nearer home. (No, not the BBC's travails though I have no sympathy whatsoever with broadcasters who appear to have no understanding of the concept of law.)

Lord Willoughby de Broke put down the following Written Question in the House of Lords;
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the proposals by the European Commission to harmonise European Union roadworthiness regulations; and what effect these proposals will have on the ownership of classic and vintage cars in the United Kingdom.
Earl Attlee, replying on behalf of HMG, as ever produced a mealy-mouthed explanation (as if Ministers could ever do otherwise).
An initial assessment has been made on the proposal which suggests potential significant costs to the UK. At the recent Transport Council the Government intervened and expressed serious concerns about the proposal, which will remove the requirement to have an annual roadworthiness test for vehicles over 30 years old and of historic interest, while limiting allowable modifications. The Government will continue to challenge those provisions that imply unmerited costs.
What, may one ask, are unmerited costs and, more importantly, is the London - Brighton Veteran Car Run safe from the regulators who, undoubtedly, have our best interests at heart?


  1. Lord Attlee at least has an interest in historic commercial vehicles which is slightly encouraging. The problem is this 'limiting allowable modifications' threat. If a car is pre-war, for example, who knows what the original specification was anyway? And what is 'allowable' and why, and who decides?

    If a pre-war saloon has had its rotted body replaced by a new sports body what's wrong with that? If I fit modern shock absorbers, fuel pumps, oil filters and headlamps to my 1933 tourer, thereby making it safer and more reliable, is that allowable? If I change the engine because there are no parts available for the old one is that allowable? It never had seat belts so it doesn't need them now by law. Will that still be allowable?

    We are into an age of bureaucratic insanity where EU pests are being paid to sit on their untaxed backsides thinking up new regulations for everybody else to live by. The solution is to get out of the EU and stop their gratuitous interference in what remains of our freedom.

  2. Well I shall miss it, as indeed I miss a lot of things, but hey I'm lucky in that I have a least had the pleasure of riding old machines, and restoring and cherishing them, revelling in the wonders of the early pioneers, all from an age when there was freedom from the bureaucratic insanity/fascism.
    But this all started a long time ago, with helmets and seat-belts and a thousand little cuts that no one except an extremist could possibly object too, (Well non of you did , did you?) it was all in the very best tradition of protecting the masses from themselves, just a little light touch here and bit of regulation there, all in the best possible interest.
    Lap it up, freedom was sold out long ago, and I'm sure you understand its only a little inconvenience for a few extremists uphs enthusiasts.
    You can always see old vehicles in museums and occasionally at specific organised events staged under controlled and supervised conditions by order of your masters.
    And yes I did object and protest at the time, but I guess the main stream didn’t want to listen, no one wanted to bother about our little freedoms, and they still don’t, same old same old, the lifes laid down by my fore bearers where cheaply sold.