Re: Strong don't meddle warning!
- From: "Ian Cardinal" <ian.cardinal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 08:24:49 -0000
"Adrian" <reply@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
On Thu, 17 Feb 2011 00:27:26 -0800 (PST), Roger MurrayI don't have a problem with "private" per se, but I doubt that Adrian's
The governments dramatic u-turn this morning on the decision to sell
off and privatise the nations forests clearly highlights the publics
abhorrence at such national treasures being meddled with and thrown to
the mercy of the commercial sector. The public response, from every
quarter was phenomenal.
At one time, Britain was almost covered with forest. Action by
people over centuries, with the (tacit) approval of various types of
government, have reduced that forest to the rump that exists today.
And despite the fact that reforestation would have huge environmental
benefits, not leas the absortion of atmospheric carbon, government
prevents this through such idiocies as the subsidisation of hill
farming (which is about to be increased) which ensures uneconomic
sheep keep scalping the uplands.
If you value something (especially a "national treasure"), I suggest
you should do your damnedest to keep/get the government's hands off
it, rather than crowing when the opposite occurs.
Which partly explains why BW (operating somewhat at arms length from
government) has been better than BWB (which was really under the
government's thumb). And why I hope the new National Inland
Navigation Authority may be better still.
"Mercy of the commercial sector"? A businessman will usually know
that preservation of capital is the first rule of management. It's
actually the lack of private ownership that is resulting in such
horrors as over-fishing, where government merely argues about (and
then retreats on, in the face of special-interest lobbying) the size
of the quotas. A private owner would give priority to preserving the
stock (i.e. the long-term capital investment), and charge for fish
caught instead of subsidising fishers.
Have you noticed how many developments are being permitted in the
Green Belt these days?
"Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the
problem." (R. Reagan).
It's so frustrating that so few Brits have realised this.
argument holds in this case. The Forestry Commission has been working since
(basically) the First World War and has been doing a job that has earned it
great respect and affection from the people of this country, as is obvious
from the reaction
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it" seems to be the wisest course in this case
and I am delighted the Government has seen sense
We have seen far too many asset strippers in my time: my old firm of British
Leyland is a particular case in point
aka Norman the Narrowboat
- Prev by Date: Re: Draco Crafts
- Next by Date: Re: Draco Crafts
- Previous by thread: Re: Strong don't meddle warning!
- Next by thread: Re: Strong don't meddle warning!