Now whilst there were a few journalists around to witness events, the biggest Press presence was that of the BBC in the form of Paul Clifton, BBC South Today's traffic correspondent and local resident with a camera crew. Now it must be said that Paul has been scrupulously impartial in his reporting of issues surrounding the A303 at Stonehenge; often to the frustration of us members of STAG.
I was curious to understand the ethics of the BBC interviewing Dan Snow - who seems to do rather a lot of TV and book work for them. That's perhaps a point for others, particularly BBC management, to ponder. Perhaps, to restore confidence in their impartiality, they might want to consider getting Jeremy Clarkson and the Top Gear team to do a bit of off-roading through the World Heritage Site (WHS)? Then again, given the current fuss about Jezza, perhaps not...
...but Captain Slow and the Hamster would suffice!
If you want to read a bit more about the nonsense Dan Snow and the Stonehenge Aliens were putting forward during his interviews, you can read it here on our sister blog for the Stonehenge Traffic Action Group. The key message seems to be that they want to persuade UNESCO to put pressure on the government to abandon plans for a tunnel under Stonehenge. Indeed, Dan Snow was, apparently, pushing the line that he would prefer to leave the A303 in its current undualed state past Stonehenge rather than put it into a tunnel that might at least remove a view of the road from a large part of the WHS and achieve one of UNESCO's aims for the WHS.
Part of the problem when talking to the Stonehenge Aliens is that they can't seem to come up with a collective story about what they actually want. Some want to remove the A303 entirely from the WHS landscape, others want to ban a tunnel at all costs for fear it would: alter the water table, cause Stonehenge to sink into the ground/fall over, attract aliens, cause Salisbury Cathedral to flood, add to global warming and increase the cost of cheese. Please delete or add to these scare stories as appropriate. A few of them seem to support the idea of a dual-carriageway tunnel, providing it starts and ends outside the WHS. However, few of the latter have thought through their argument. Whilst the present WHS has clear boundaries, some leeway should be given to the possibility of further, related, archaeological discoveries beyond the present confines of the WHS; particularly between the two geographical features that define the sitelines to the east and the west - Beacon Hill on the Hampshire/Wiltshire border and Little Down, west of Yarnbury Castle where Salisbury Plain falls away towards Deptford - we'll come back to this a bit later.
Living in Winterbourne Stoke, the NIMBY in me says that I too would prefer to remove the A303 from the landscape - either by routing it miles to the north, or stuffing it into a very long tunnel that goes under the village and Stonehenge. Unfortunately, many in the Stonehenge Alliance are so fixated on preserving the past, that they cannot entertain the needs of the present or the future. Nor can may of them contemplate the need for pragmatism and compromise - nor cost. Whilst the Chancellor might have announced that austerity was over in yesterday's budget, he didn't mean he had a bottomless purse to improve the A303.
It's perhaps worth raising a few key points here. First, the Stonehenge Alliance are objecting to a plan that doesn't yet exist in any real detail. All we know so far is that the government have set aside £1.3 billion for a tunnel, which they suggest would be a minimum of 2.8km (1.8 miles) long. That sounds a lot of money, but when you consider the Lærdal Tunnel in Norway, currently the World's longest road tunnel at 24.5km , cost only £150 million between 1995 and 2000 - then £1.3 billion might buy a bit more than 2.9 km of tunnel!
Second, UNESCO love tunnels - Fact. Only two sites in the world have ever lost WHS status. One in Oman which was de-listed at the request of the Omani government and the second was in Dresden in relation to a site near the River Elbe. The Dresden authorities wanted to improve the flow of traffic over the Elbe, UNESCO were against a bridge and proposed a tunnel instead, the Dresden authoriies stuck two fingers in the air and built the bridge anyway. As a consequence, UNESCO finally delisted the WHS in June 2009. So, the good news is, it's hard to see how UNESCO could possibly favour leaving the current A303 in the WHS, when even a short tunnel could improve the landscape.
Third, if by some chance Stonehenge Alliance kick up enough of a fuss to gain UNESCO attention and overturn UNESCO's preference for hiding obtrusive roads underground, then UNESCO may choose to make the threat of removal of WHS status - it could happen. The next UK government, sniffing the prospect of a massive cash saving, may be tempted to call UNESCO's bluff and get the Stonehenge WHS de-listed. A massive own-goal for the Stonehenge Alliance and a slap in the face of STAG and the local population who wish to both improve the current road situation and conserve the WHS. No doubt the Aliens will point out that the land either side of the A303 is owned by the National Trust and is inviolate. That is true. It is equally true that a determined government, even a coalition, could overturn such protection for the greater good of the nation and build an on-line dual carriageway. Now whilst such a cheap and cheerful option would be very popular to some in the local community and those who travel the route daily from further afield, I would find the prospect horrific. Whilst I don't believe this is a credible or realistic option, it is possible. To my mind, it is also the worst possible outcome for the WHS.
Fourth, whilst I and others might share the wish that the A303 could be re-routed outside the WHS (as it is now, now or as it might one day be expanded to be), that isn't on offer. Period, full-stop.It is NOT on offer.
There is another option which might just achieve everyone's aims. Indeed, I suggested it to Dan Snow just before his interview with Paul Clifton. Dan had, quite rightly in my view, expressed the most sensible thing he said all morning. That was his belief that the Stonehenge WHS had a unique national, indeed global, significance and value and should be protected. I suggested that we could test this shared view in a very pragmatic way: set up a public subscription, as the Victorians used to do to fund major works. The international response to the subscription appeal would prove once and for all whether the concept of the Stonehenge WHS had any value at all. Do people really value their heritage? If not' let's just proceed as has been proposed.
Of course, let's not forget the fact that last August, Dan Snow and his wife, the heiress Lady Edwina Grosvenor, the second child of the Duke of Westminster, intimated that they don't want any possible inheritance to be a burden to their children and might give it away to charity. Admirable stuff that. Now, the Duke of Westminster is pretty high up the UK rich list and has a bob or two, an estimated fortune of about £8.5 billion. That would buy an awful lot of tunnel - about 17.5 km. Perhaps the idea of a "Duke of WestminsterGlobal Heritage Tunnel" might be an appealing legacy - especially to someone who made their fortune because of land?
Going back to my earlier point of a long tunnel that crossed the current and any probable future sitelines of an expanded WHS, then the Duke of Westminster's legacy could easily pay for the 13.5 km of tunnel needed to cross the obvious geographical features and still leave some pocket money for the children and grandchildren. It's just a suggestion and I wouldn't want the Westminster's to feel under any obligation...
I think, however, it is only fair to leave the last word to the "opposition" - the Stonehenge Alliance...
1 comment:
Good to see you back G.D.!!
Post a Comment