Proposed sale of UK woodlands

[Martin Baxendale]

I still can't quite get used to seeing Gerry Adams' name as that of a member of parliament.

[Maggi Young]

Rather a lot of "absent" names there, don't you think?

 Our MP voted  "yes" 

[Neil]

Rather a lot of "absent" names there, don't you think?

MPs often buddy up with opposite Members, who are going to vote differently, so that they don't have attend the vote, ie each Members vote would cancel the other's out.

[Gerry Webster]

Rather a lot of "absent" names there, don't you think?

MPs often buddy up with opposite Members, who are going to vote differently, so that they don't have attend the vote, ie each Members vote would cancel the other's out.

I believe that in the UK that is what is known as democracy.

[Martin Baxendale]

Rather a lot of "absent" names there, don't you think?

 Our MP voted  "yes"  

Maggi, you do realise the vote was on whether to have a rethink on the sell-off. Your MP voted to have a rethink. It wasn't a vote on whether to have the sell off. So your MP voted the 'right' way. The big vote on going ahead with the sell off will come after the government's so-called consultation.

[Gerry Webster]

Martin is correct. A 'Yes' vote was the right vote.

[Maggi Young]

Rather a lot of "absent" names there, don't you think?

 Our MP voted  "yes"  

Maggi, you do realise the vote was on whether to have a rethink on the sell-off. Your MP voted to have a rethink. It wasn't a vote on whether to have the sell off. So your MP voted the 'right' way. The big vote on going ahead with the sell off will come after the government's so-called consultation.

Aha, Yes, okay, I got wrong end of the stick, or woodland, as the case might be.... I was puzzled.......so she voted in favour of a re-think and/or protection of the status quo? Excellent!

[David Nicholson]

Gerry apparently my MP was absent ,WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

Probably far to busy preparing his expenses claim to bother attending

I went through the full voting list and of the Conservative members attending only two voted Yes-Julian Lewis the member for New Forest East, and Zac Goldsmith the member for Richmond Park. Don't suppose either would have dared to go back to their constituencies if they had voted No.

[Gerry Webster]

Gerry apparently my MP was absent ,WHAT DOES THAT MEAN?

Davey - my apologies, I've only just seen this post. I think David has provided the most likely  answer

Probably far to busy preparing his expenses claim to bother attending

[Gerry Webster]

So far  490,000 people have signed the petition against the sell-off. The organisers are hoping to make this half a million.

The  scale of  public opposition to the proposals seems to have caught the coalition unawares and publicly they appear to have been making concessions It looks like they  hope that these recent  (& minor) concessions will cause the fuss to die down so they can press on with  their plans for a sell off. The requisite change in the law  will be included  in  the Public Bodies Bill when it comes before MPs in the next few weeks. It is this legislation that will give the government the powers it needs to go ahead with the removal of woodlands from public ownership.

If you object to these proposals, it is not too late to sign the petition & make your views known to your MP.

[David Nicholson]

Below is copy of an Email from my MP in response to my Email telling him he was gutless at the last House vote. By the way he always signs himself as "Gary", he's not a personal friend or anything



<SNIP>Dear Mr Nicholson,

Thank you for your further email on this matter.

I think it important to stress that this is a genuine consultation exercise.  The reaction from the public has been dramatic and overwhelming.   I have made my own representations based on many of the concerns that my constituents have raised with me and I will be very surprised indeed if after the consultation period ends in April this policy is not significantly reconfigured.

Very best wishes,
Gary
<SNIP>

[Gerry Webster]

As many people will have heard, the proposal to sell off English woodlands  has apparently been  abandoned & the so-called consultations will be scrapped. While this is cause for celebration I think we should remain vigilant; I cannot believe that this government would be content for public interest to take  precedence over private profit.

[Neil]

There can still sell off 15% every 4 years http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12488847  down the bottom

[Gerry Webster]

There can still sell off 15% every 4 years http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12488847  down the bottom

As I understand it, 15% of the forest estate is the maximum the Government can sell under current legislation. It is reported (by Reuters) that this sale has been put on hold while ministers "review the criteria for the sale" (whatever this means). The proposed 15% sale  is quite distinct from, (& I believe predates), the  proposal for  the massive sell-off which would have required new legislation.

[Tony Willis]

There can still sell off 15% every 4 years http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12488847  down the bottom

As I understand it, 15% of the forest estate is the maximum the Government can sell under current legislation. It is reported (by Reuters) that this sale has been put on hold while ministers "review the criteria for the sale" (whatever this means). The proposed 15% sale  is quite distinct from, (& I believe predates), the  proposal for  the massive sell-off which would have required new legislation.

As I understand it the previous government exercised this option several times without consultation or a national outcry. The problem here was they were going to sell the pretty ones and quite rightly people were outraged.