Forum menu
The argument I believe is that the forests where established for the national good, ok it was due to a national shortage of wood following the first world war, however this is a case of selling something that belongs to all.
How can it be that a few can make that decision and how would the proceeds be spent, would we have any say in this!!
I've already asked, but is this any different to a government selling off the gold reserves? Presumably, "a few can make that decision" because we elected them to govern, and therefore make decisions, on our behalf.
I've already asked, but is this any different to a government selling off the gold reserves?
You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel druidh ..........what difference does it make whether or not it's no different to "selling off the gold reserves" ffs ?
Does [i]that[/i] make it right or wrong ?
I've already asked, but is this any different to a government selling off the gold reserves? Presumably, "a few can make that decision" because we elected them to govern, and therefore make decisions, on our behalf.
The fundamental difference between Gold and [u]English Woodland[/u] is that Gold is an internationally traded commodity where as the woodland in this country was set aside specifically for the production of timber and/or public use (Albeit within certain limits), Gold sits in a vault it's value tracking the markets, we held it in reserve specifically so in a pinch we can generate some cash, Gordo like or loath him was sort of using the gold reserves for it's intended purpose...
The only real revenue set aside British woodland was really ever intended to generate was from Timber sales and Tourism, it's really a long term "investment" if you stick to these core revenue generators I can't see the Sultan of Brunei getting all excited about these "investment opportunities"... Unless of course any current restrictions were to be changed in some way...
Flog your local woods to an investment fund and they will make a cold hard Business decision on how they optimize the profitability of their investment... Assuming there is a good legal way to do it, if they can't see a way to make money they probably won't bother with it..
To be honest I'm not sure what the current legal checks and balances are when it comes to private owners of Woodland in the UK, permissions to "Develop", Deforest, changes access rights, even whether or not they have to have their land managed by the FC or not, of course Dave can probably tack a few innocuous little lines onto a minor bill that will let one of his Eton Buddies build a couple of tower blocks in FoD, but that may just be me being a little paranoid...
There is a fair amount of privately owned, publicly accessed woodland at present, much of it has made use of grants to help operators with setting up trails and other attractions...
Given a potential Tax saving for ownership of woodland investment in woodland would make sense but ultimately most private investors probably want to make money not slowly see it drip away in an "un-developable" chunk of land...
ANd as for Charities buying woodland, Why would they? it's not like they need the tax breaks and what do they acquire? an asset? or a long list of management and maintenance costs along with insurance and liabilities, how's that going to help them feed the homeles or cure AIDS?
The more important question for the wider (Not so bothered about trees land access and trails) public is just how much of a dent if any will this Land grab really make in our apparently bolloxed economy?
The quote from Guardian linked article above:
[i]
[/i]£150m and £250m over 10 years
What? How Much?!!?! (Or little...)
OK £250 Million sounds like a "Big number" but in reality that is Eff all if the Dire prognostications of our current leaders are to be believed, effectively taking a £25M a Year chip out of what they claim is a £900 billion! Debt... Hardly going to break the back of the problem is it...
The figures don't add up, the Market for land you can't really do much with other than grow trees on or Walk/Run/Cycle around seems rather minimal, so I can't help thinking there's a touch more to the proposal than we're presently being fed...
Ah - the "conspiracy theory" argument....
Indeed... you honestly Trust the Tories?
I'm of the generation that Had Maggie snatch our milk away, Literally she turned up in person and stole the lot, and punched a six year old as she left cackling...
Ah - the "conspiracy theory" argument....
I can't see any "conspiracy theory" argument, but I can see a crap argument which says : [i]"but the government sold off the gold reserves so it must be OK to sell off Britain's publicly owned forests then"[/i].
Actually it isn't an argument at all.
Druidh is right in that there is no difference morally or legally between selling the gold reserves, selling britsh steel, selling the power companies and selling off british rail to selling the forests
it just won't wash that there is any fundamental difference
Thats completely different to whether its the right thing to do or not but to try to make out that the forests are in some way different is laughable
I actually think it is politically stupid. No significant money in it and will incure the wrath of "middle england" who are essential to winning elections. I fail to understand why - is it just stupidity?
is it just stupidity?
No, sadly. It's ideology. Far worse.
Thats completely different to whether its the right thing to do or not.....
Not to Druidh it isn't ........... if Labour behaved badly, then it must mean that the Tories are right in everything they do !
........oh bless his simple little mind 😀
ernie - I don't think he has actually said that.
Waht gets me about the stupidity is that it will alienate their natural supporters and the floating " middle england".. Politically naive and all for a few pennies
Actualy TJ, I think they're selling it so it can be made into landing sites for alien spacecraft. Either that, or Elvis has decided to move to the UK and is looking for some quiet spots for himself, Marilyn Monroe and Jacko.
Are yiou sure its not to replenish your spirtle supply?
Spurtle! 😈
To be fair I can sort of see the confuzzled logic Gordon employed when flogging our Gold reserves to generate cash, those adverts are all over the telly at Jeremy Kyle O'clock...
Not so many ad's asking you to post the deeds to your 15 Acres full of pine trees for a [i]"free valuation with no obligation to sell" [/i]
Still comparing one shite Decision with another is hardly a compelling argument to follow that course of action...
Next they'll be saying we should Force the NHS to buy in all of their services from Sub-contractors and place all the spending controls in the hands of GPs... Oh... 🙄
I predict another 4 years of [i]"It's all the last lots Fault"[/i] while they flog anything they can to their mates and bitch slap Clegg if he dares to pipe up.
Then the Meat head Sun/Mail readers will vote them back in when they promise to give a free Pukka pie to anyone who doesn't like "lefty shirt lifter types"... Bosh job done; UK knackered by posh boy with face that looks a bit like like a Ham...
I'm looking forwards to 2013 when "UK PLC" sell the Isle of white to North Korea...
ANd as for Charities buying woodland, Why would they? it's not like they need the tax breaks and what do they acquire? an asset? or a long list of management and maintenance costs along with insurance and liabilities, how's that going to help them feed the homeles or cure AIDS?
Spot on. I volunteer for a local Wildlife Trust and they are regularly offered new places to manage, however most of the time they have to politely decline as it's hard enough keeping up with their current responsibilities.
ernie - I don't think he has actually said that.
Well he needs to explain why he keeps waffling on about "the gold reserves" in that case.
Great isn,t it, the Tory bankers destroy the economy and then get to buy all our Forests for a knock down price of there corrupt mates.