Controversy - Trust Annual Report 1976
There can be no doubt that the controversy concerning the M3 has been the major environmental issue for Winchester during 1976. Though there were a few participants from elsewhere at the Inquiry, it was the local objectors who were so vociferous. Others were there because they believed passionately that the interests of the whole country are threatened by the present road building programme, and it is a national as well as a local matter. From the outset it was apparent that the Inquiry was about the way we are governed, as well as the proposed motorway.
The prominence given in the news to the disturbances at the M3 Inquiry, has tended to conceal the reasons for those events. It should be made clear that there were two main objections. First, that of the Action Group, concerned with the specific M3 proposal between Popham and Compton, represented by Counsel and Associated Planning Consultants. Secondly, that of the Conservation Society represented by Mr John Tyme, concerned with motorways in general and public Inquiries in particular. The public supported both these objections.
There can be little doubt, that despite ascertain amount of derogatory criticism in letters to the press, and by an MP or two, the tactics of noisy demonstrations at the initial hearings were appropriate and justifiable. They undoubtedly served their intended purpose of emphasising the extent and strength of the opposition to the M3 preferred route, and gave the otherwise seemingly local issue a' national significance.
At the 1971 Inquiry, the objectors adopted the rules which they innocently assumed were drafted for their, protection. The proceedings during and subsequent to that Inquiry, have shown that the Department ignore such rules or interprets them arbitrarily. The present spate of unilateral orders by Ministers, beyond the scope or intention of legislation, is a feature relevant to the M3 Inquiry which has been exposed by recent judicial decisions. Opposition to the M3 has a wider constitutional application, and the 1976 campaign had to resort to modern tactics of unruly demonstration against authoritarianism.
Moreover there has been disillusion throughout the country about the value of building motorways. In this connection the following points must be noted. Motorways enable traffic to travel greater distances in a shorter space of time, but with a greater expenditure of non-renewable fuel. It is only a matter of time before this country will have to adopt a lower speed limit, as the Americans have already done to conserve fuel and save lives. This will make the present design standards unnecessary.