UK to sell half of forests

The UK government has confirmed plans to sell off up to half of its state-owned forests to private companies.

The around 150,000 hectares of land could be used for commercial development, which worries many conservations.

Harry Smith reports from Sherwood Forest, one of England's most popular woodlands.

[October 31, 2010]

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• al
• jazeera
• english
• uk
• united
• kington
• forests
• half
• europenews
• harry
• smith
• sherwood
• conservations

[druidbloke]

The majority of it wont go to people doing good work returning the forest to it's natural state, and even the parts that do, how will it's future be guaranteed if it can be sold off again at any time, where there's profit to be had never believe what they have to say.

[parrytonneath]

A stretch of the old South Wales mineral railway was sold around 15 years ago near where I live by the local council who owned the land. We were promised that the public would have full access to the land and the owner would improve the woodland paths, and also construct benches and pick-nick areas.No member of the local community has set foot on that land since, and anybody who has tried have been greeted with the words"get off my land."

[VinnyMonster1]

This shows the type of greedy, selfish power loving dickheads we have in power.

[Wh47n0w1517]

The UK’s government don’t own the forests, who the f*ck does the government think they are? The forests belong to the people of the UK and the people of the UK should be telling them so.

[ExquisiteDoom]

@hablerz Morality is replacing Gods with your own subjective preferences and giving them superpowers. We really don't need this anymore, it should be clear in the year 2010 that this is an incorrect philosophy...

[ExquisiteDoom]

@hablerz I happen to beleive emergentism makes more sense than a worldwide conspiracy, once you understand how cartels eventually destroy themselves you understand how a world cannot be controlled by a handful of people without in-fighting, you also understand how you can't possibly manage billions of people's lives efficiently enough to maintain your rule.

Morality is what religion is based on... Morality presupposes that there is one way to act, as dictated by itself, thus a form of theism.

[hablerz]

@ExquisiteDoom I think morality should cloud the judgement , in fact it should DICTATE judgement.

I dont think many things happen by accident in this world , if thats what you mean by conspiracy theorist.

All religions are purely a control mechanism for people and they have been around for thousands of years, so you might call it a conspiracy.

[ExquisiteDoom]

@hablerz Historians and physicists can mislead people into shitty investments like green technology and then financial ruin (not slavery... you seem to be one of those "everything is a conspiracy" type of people)

Narrow and inhuman compared to what? Moral arguments aren't worth shit to me because they cloud your judgement. Saying financiers do illicit things is just saying you don't like it, and my answer is,no shit you don't like it, which i dont consider to be a reasonable argument.

[ExquisiteDoom]

@hablerz I object to banking fraud. I don't object to insider trading. Why would you let outside forces trade a stock with noooo signal from the actual company stock owners (other than word to mouth and the fact that they own stock and how much of it) ? How the hell is this supposed to work and not just be speculatory gamble?

As for banking fraud, what is this fraud you speak of? There are many, you're just too vague.

[hablerz]

@ExquisiteDoom Financiers are part of cartels , its not a case of knowing anything ,they just manipulate things illicitly.

A Historian or a Physicist does not drive people into financial slavery.

Im not finally right , ive been right all along , its just you have a narrow and inhuman attitude to the world.