Help the Save Our Forests Campaign

In my last post in this blog Stop the Selling off of our Forests and Woodlands I listed the things, we as the electorate could do to stop the Government selling off the Forests and Woodlands in England that are owned by the Nation and which they are, through the Forestry Commission the custodians.

Top of this list was Sign the Petition at the 38 Degrees Website: Save our Forests. This petition which started off with a target of 200,000 Signatures has when I looked today (27 January) had reached 254,878 and was now aiming for 300,000! Obviously this petition has caught the Public's imagination and if you haven't yet signed I urge you to do so.

38 Degrees now want to take this campaign to a new level by launching an advertisement in the National Press and are requesting donations to make this possible. In this time of austerity, this request give me pause for thought as the sum required to do this is £20,000, of which when I looked over £5,800 had already been raised. As I believe that is very important that the Government does NOT sell off these National Assets (and covertly this has already started - See: Rigg Wood, article from the Telegraph 23 January 2011), so if you can, please donate here: Sponsor the forests advert today

Here is a mock-up of the proposed ad:

There are other petitions:

• Sign the Petition at the Woodland Trust Website: Save England's Ancient Forests
  
• Sign the Petition at Save England's Forests: Save England's Forests

Also you can lobby both your MP and the Lord's through the WriteToThem website

Stop the Selling off of our Forests and Woodlands

David Cameron who had promised to make his administration the greenest government in British history (perhaps he meant greediest Government in British History?), is determined to sell off one of our National Assets the government owned Woodlands and Forests in England, For once devolution has proved useful as the Scottish and Welsh Forests and Woodland will remain safe. Because the Westminster Politicians cannot get their greedy hands on them.

As a sign of what the future may hold if the Government gets its way see the case of: Rigg Wood, article from the Telegraph 23 January 2011. Which rather negates message in the letter sent to all MPs by defra (see below):

The Government, through the Forestry Commission are merely custodians of these national Assets, which are part of the Nations Heritage and should not have the right to treat them as a commodity that can be sold in the market place. What makes this disgraceful situation even worse is they have decided to start this process without even bringing the subject before parliament by selling off 15% of the Forest Estate by 2015. They can do this without debate, or changing legislation. So much for transparent, open Government. Also within the Public Bodies Bill which is currently at the Committee Stage in the Lords is a clause allowing the Environment Minister Powers to transfer Land Ownership without reference to Parliament (so much for reducing Big Government?). This must be stopped.

So what can we, the electorate do about this, after all there isn't going to be a referendum on this issue,

• Sign the Petition at the 38 Degrees Website: Save our Forests - When I last looked 176,504 already had!
• Sign the Petition at the Woodland Trust Website: Save England's Ancient Forests
  
• Sign the Petition at Save England's Forests: Save England's Forests
• Email everyone you know who is a British Citizen to also sign these petitions.
  
• Start lobbying your MP either directly, or through: WriteToThem website
• Their Lordships can also be lobbied through: WriteToThem website, This is important as the Public Bodies Bill, which includes clauses allowing the Secretary for State to transfer ownership of land without further reference to Parliament, or anyone else. The Lord's Committee reviewing this bill restarts its deliberations on the 25th January 2011. What is required is an Amendment to the Bill, removing the ability of a minister to make the decision, without reference to parliament to sell off certain national assets and especially sections 17, 18 & 19 in the bill which are specific to the Forestry Commission & its assets.
• Every time the subject comes up in an Online News Site add a comment opposing the Sale of the Forests and Woodlands and the effective destruction of one of few Government bodies that actually does a good job, the Forestry Commission.

The slow and almost covert sale of National assets to Private and indeed often foreign ownership by successive Governments has been going on for far too long. But this is not just a privatisation too far, but a disgraceful act and needs to be stopped.

Here is the text of a letter sent to all MPs (including those in Wales , Scotland and Northern Island who are not really affected) by defra:

Dear Sir/Madam

In view of recent speculation I am writing to explain the reason behind the inclusion of powers for modernisation of the forestry legislation in the Public Bodies Bill, which has just been introduced into Parliament.

Contrary to some beliefs, the Forestry Commission’s estate covers only 18% of England’s wooded areas. Nevertheless it is of great importance in the provision of access, biodiversity, carbon storage and many other public benefits. Some of it is producing much of our domestic timber, other areas are almost entirely devoted to public benefit and others are a mix of the two.

We are committed to shifting the balance of power from ‘Big Government’ to ‘Big Society’ by giving individuals, businesses, civil society organisations and local authorities a much bigger role in protecting and enhancing the natural environment and a much bigger say about our priorities for it.

By including enabling powers in the Bill we will be in a position to make reforms to managing the estate. We will consult the public on our proposals later this year, and will invite views from a wide range of potential private and civil society partners on a number of new ownership options and the means to secure public benefits. We envisage a managed programme of reform to further develop a competitive, thriving and resilient forestry sector that includes many sustainably managed woods operating as parts of viable land-based businesses.

We will not compromise the protection of our most valuable and biodiverse forests. Full measures will remain in place to preserve the public benefits of woods and forests under any new ownership arrangements. Tree felling is controlled through the licensing system managed by the Forestry Commission, public rights of way and access will be unaffected, statutory protection for wildlife will remain in force and there will be grant incentives for new planting that can be applied for. When publishing our proposals we will explore further the options for securing and increasing the wide range of public benefits currently delivered by Government ownership and how they might be achieved at lower cost.

This will be a new approach to ownership and management of woodlands and forests, with a reducing role for the State and a growing role for the private sector and civil society. At the same time, it reflects the Government’s firm commitment to the continued conservation of the biodiversity and other public benefits which forests and woodland provide. These aims are not incompatible with alternative models of ownership, or our commitment to the natural environment.

What load of tosh! See Rigg Wood!

Despite my almost genetic distrust of Politicians I did have a smidgen of hope that David Cameron might just make a good Prime Minister. So far my hope has not been realised and supporting the sale of Forests and Woodlands does not bode well.

External Links:
Save England's Forests
Save our Woods
Woodland Trust
38 Degrees Website: Save our Forests

The Magical Forest (Blog Post)

Social Networks
Facebook - Save our Forests

Linda Norgrove Articles Guardian 21st Jan 2011

Today the Guardian ran two similar articles on Linda Norgrove and both are informative, interesting and worth reading:
Linda Norgrove took photos of Afghan captor before death in botched rescue
and
Linda Norgrove: 'She took a lot of risks'
I just wish they hadn't used the word 'botched' (twice in the first article and once in the second), 'failed' would have been fine.

Moving on: One important element in both articles is that Linda Norgrove's parents have established:
The Linda Norgrove Foundation which is a new grant-giving trust that provides funding for women, families and children in Afghanistan. The Foundation provides help in the following areas:

Education

Health

Childcare, including orphanages

Scholarships to help Afghan women go to university.

The foundation certainly deserves support in its aims.

To its credit the Guardian has made a donation to the Foundation. One hopes it makes similar donations to the families of British and Americian charities that support the families of those killed in action? Appears not, but then maybe I botched up my search keywords!

Prisoners and the Vote - No Change required!

The BBC's Nick Robinson published an article earlier this morning (0515 20 Jan 2011) with the title: Ministers in climbdown over prisoner vote rights in which he writes that the government is preparing to scale back plans to give the right to vote to thousands of prisoners serving sentences of under four years. They now propose to limit the right to those sentenced to a year or less.

But this misses the point, Belgium and Eire, and indeed 11 other countries who signed the 1953 European Convention on Human Rights do NOT allow Prisoners the vote. Yet they are not being singled out by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). Belgium goes further and can deny the vote to Prisoners even after they are released.

So why has Britain been singled out? Because the ban is automatic rather than part of the sentencing procedure. So just change the law, so that every year handed down as a sentence is given the same number of years voting ban (this to remain in force even if paroled, or early release).

However better still face down the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and MPs will have the opportunity to defy the court's ruling in a couple of weeks' time when the Commons debates a motion tabled by Conservative David Davis and Labour's Jack Straw (I for one will be watching how the MP for my constituency votes on this).

Actually I would much rather the vote was on withdrawing completely from the 1953 Convention and instead preparing over the next few years a British bill of Human Rights which is based on the safety of citizens and the protection of victims of crime rather than the rights of those whose Criminal or other acts endanger the Citizens of this Country.

Related Post in this blog:
EU Law overrides UK Law and (some) Convicts will get the Vote 02nd November 2010
Douglas Carswell MP: Governed by judges? 05th November 2010

Other Articles:

• Tory rebels given green light to crush prison votes
• Far fewer prisoners will now get the right to vote
• Votes for (some) prisoners to get a vote in Parliament