The Driver's Site for the East Midlands

Welcome to Drivers' Union East Midlands.
Our Mission: Better road safety at lower cost. No unnecessary delay or slowing of road transport. No unnecessary or unjust prosecution of safe drivers.

Motorists & Drivers' Union is at

For specific topics click the appropriate label (above).

Search This Blog

Sunday, 4 October 2015

Edmund King. Pro driver? Or profiteer and anti driver ideologist impostor?

Edmund King President of AA
'AA boss accused of pocketing millions from speed awareness courses' 

I am not jumping on The Bandwagon because anyone who follows my work will know that I have challenged and criticised King for years and indeed this post in Nov 2012 proves  how I was three years ahead of the Mirror & Sun.  

A keen cyclist, King loves to promote himself (and boy does King promote himself), as a voice of the caring driver for the Cycle Lobby which loves him. Of course it does. Anyone who is going to reduce an essential infrastructure of 35 million people to the same level as an unessential pursuit, minority, lobby group is bound to be an injustice to the former and an advantage to the latter. Added to which of course in no way can cyclists be good for drivers. They are an enforced liability and encumbrance the like of which that wouldn't be foisted on rail or air transport. Collide with one and drivers could be looking at a long term of imprisonment. 

So why would AA and King be so keen on cycling if it's to the disadvantage of drivers at all? Well King's background is he is ex RAC Foundation. See a bit of them here. No friends of the private car drivers so it's not surprising that King brings with him his pro cycling credentials. So far as the AA are concerned, more cycling means less car damage to fix and indeed cyclists are cynically being told to use their unprotected bodies two abreast, to impede and dictate their slow speeds on drivers. All of this is definitely an advantage to a driver insurance company which is what AA is. They support speed cameras too. Not withstanding that anyone profiting from them would do, as with using cyclists, slowing everything down plus points on licences causing higher premiums, also results in less work for more money. For an insurance company, it's all win win then. 

The fact is that, because AA fix cars, it doesn't mean that they're a driver's group. They sell cycling gear, fix plumbing, sell insurance and are too diverse to be considered a drivers' group now.

It should be of no surprise then that King presented himself, with other cycling lobbyists, to a Parliamentary Transport Select Committee and claimed to be representing drivers. See the disgrace of how this committee failed us all. Even from his own comments to the committee, he could hardly be speaking for drivers there. But what was significant was the moment when he told Madam Chair that we ought to have more Awareness Courses without telling her that he was a director of one of the busiest of the firms running them. Even the Sun & The Mirror didn't uncover that one. I did.


  1. I actually agree with some of what you have said with regard to speeding and the improper use of logging incidents by the police, having being on a speed awareness course 7 years ago I brought up the subject of dangerous driving below the speed limit and how police forces lack the understanding to enforce real safety across the country. HOWEVER, your little piece above regarding cyclists enforcing their speed onto motorists when (legally) riding two abreast is just absolute nonsense of epic proportions and contradicts pretty much what you've said in other pieces. that outside cyclist is in a position recommended by RoSPA, DfT, the CTC and many other organisations due to the fact that the vast majority of motorists are happy to buzz within a foot or less at innapropriate speed, overtake on blind bends cutting in and sometimes striking cyclists amongst other dangers posed by errant motorists. The fact of the matter is that I have more right to cycle on the roads than you & I do to drive our motorvehicles. Your writings of 23rd August are a classic case of you again going against the grain of safe driving! You clearly try to excuse your driving and innatentiveness by blaming a cyclist for not wearing hi-vis and/or having blazing lights. Basically you were driving at an innapropriate speed, one where you were unable to stop in the distance you could see to be clear. That right there is dangerous driving and yet you try to pass the buck onto an innocent person! if you cannot understand how the road system works, driving with care and attention to ensure others around you that share the roads are safe then I suggest you need to change your attitude to driving and how you approach other roads users/hazards or just stay off the roads altogether. You contradict yourself so much, you can't even see that your own attitude stinks to high heaven with regard to driving safely..bizarre in the extreme!

    1. Re my near miss. I was drving slow enough to miss him but other driers were driving faster. So you think it's sensible to ride a bike on busy dark road without lights or hi vis?

      Re two abreast : yes you do have the right to expose yourself to big essential moving machines and use your exposed body to obstruct them too but that right doesn't protect you.

      But the fact is our society doesn't need cyclists but it does need drivers.

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

  2. Re the above comments from ynotkilnarf39: Of course he's anonymous and it's full of wild generalisation, speculation and accusation. We have no idea what his driving qualifications are. But he's not specific about which posts he is critical of. Perhaps if he was to comment at the actual page and topic specifically we could all see what nonsense he makes.

    Please keep comment confined to the subject in hand and don't make wild generalisations.