Profits for ITV but what for the coffee growers ?

 I've written a letter to the Guardian :
Thank you Tim Dowling for letting us know which bit of the "This
Morning" show the birth of Product Placement took place on British TV.
It saved having to watch it all twice to spot it!  However, with him
giving the name of the product  I was able to check on its website and
found that it only takes special capsules from a well known
multinational.  Not one was Fairtrade.  What a beginning, putting in
such an "advert" at the beginning of Fairtrade Fortnight.
ITV may think it needs the money to produce programmes like this.  What
about a fair price for the coffee growers ? it is their living.

This is the link to THAT machine
https://www.dolce-gusto.co.uk/EN/shop/Pages/flavours.aspx
This is the Tim Dowling article
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2011/feb/28/product-placement-on-
british-tv

I've also posted on This Morning's facebook page, even ventured onto the Daily Mail comments page.  Let's see what happens.
Facebook page not started, but might try to think tomorrow

PRODUCT PLACEMENT UPSET and New Zealand Garden

I was most annoyed to find that "Product Placement" (where goods can be advertised as part of a TV programme's proceedings - something brought in by last Labour Government) is beginning very soon, maybe tomorrow, with a show called "This Morning" on ITV.  The product - a Nescafe coffee machine.  No mention of it being Fairtrade Coffee - and this is the beginning of Fairtrade fortnight.
I do hope I am wrong and the papers forgot to mention it is Fairtrade - but otherwise - ideas on how to campaign and who to contact ( I'm not a TV watcher, so not used to sending my views in!).

On a different note we were on a visit to Harrogate, and I always delight in seeing the lovely display of crocus on the Stray there.  Not only do they look so good, fresh and inspiring as the beginning of spring - but the rebel in me revels at how they got to be there.  The Council refused permission so some people crept out in the dark and planted them in secret.  Just imagine the furore if the Council now said they had to be removed !

We came across the New Zealand garden in the Valley Gardens.  The country so much in our thoughts right now, has special links I now remember.  Here is some of the interesting artwork in the garden - a Kiwi and Maori Pou.

SUPER SAVING OF STEEL

Just so delighted to hear that the deal has been done to save the future of steel manufacture at Redcar.  A year after the plant was mothballed, and there was doom and gloom over the whole area,  there is a whole new optimism.  A year ago I didn't even dream I would hear Vince Cable on the radio telling us this, to say nothing of Ian Swales, new MP for Redcar talking about it too.
Typical of Ian, he has worked very hard indeed in the background, and is just so pleased for everyone and everything.  He isn't claiming credit, and it will be the result of a lot of people working together, but he has worked hard, and he has kept faith in the future.

The most interesting an lively AGM of an organisation ever!  John Owens Trophy had its first proper AGM, and far from being dull and routine it was lively.  What else did I expect with an ebullient group of footballers from around the world, and people passionate about making football a fun way of doing what is rather boringly called "community cohesion".
Going round the room afterwards to ask people where they came from I found we had people from Cameroon; Eritrean/Italian; DRC; Ivory Coast, and good old England.  Quite moving to think of how so many of these countries are at war with others and themselves, yet everyone present were working together, in harmony, with football.  Not that they agreed I was a good person to chair because of my knowledge of football !

A new vision for Stockton High Street ?

A very lively councillors briefing indeed as new plans that are "visionary" for Stockton High Stree were explained to us.  I very much want to see the potential of our High Street made the most of - the widest in England (or even the country or the world ?) with real character, some splendid buildings, interesting Wynds, and above all some great people.  To say nothing of the public art installed when I was chair of the public art panel in the early 1990's !
However I have my reservations.  I will resist the tempation to say more till people have the chance to look themselves when the exhibition begins on March 10th (a week later than was said last week) for just 3 weeks.  Anyone would think an election was in the offing!
However whatever the reasons some politicians may have for condemning or promoting, I urge everyone to find out more, and make views known.

Happy birthday to me!  66 today.  What better way to celebrate than at a Fairtrade meeting, with a cake made by grandson Jack.  Ingredients for the excellent carrot cake can be made with not only Fairtrade ingredients but local Yorkshire rape seed oil, carrots and eggs too !  We all enjoyed a little taste !  then the serious business of planning for taking part in Fairtrade fortnight and Stockton playing its part in having the longest piece of handmade bunting in the world !  You need to turn up in Stockton High Street on Friday March 4th to find out just how great it is going to look !
A downturn in spirit as I had to go into Elm Tree as residents had found that daffodil bulbs newly planted out of our Councillors Ward budget had been ripped up by children.  The response was better, and between Care For Your Area, local residents and police we established that it was young children who may not hav known better, but replanting has been organised !

Nick Clegg listened !

I aml delighted that there is a reversal of the coalition policy to cut housing benefit to those on job seekers allowance for more than a year.  particularly in an area like this, it can be no fault at all of someone being out of work for some time, and the last thing they need is a penaltly like this.   was angry and upset when I heard of the plan, and pleased that Stockton and Northern Region Liberal Democrats put forward proposals to the Liberal Democrat Party Conference to demand that the vulnerable were not subject to cuts like this.  Very nervously I spoke at full conference on the issue, and was delighted to get full backing.  All worth it, now that I know that Nick Clegg did listen and has pulled support fot the original idea.

"wake up a devil in the dark" again, and then to the angelic

A presentation in York, with represtantives from all round the North East and Yorkshire about how to progress the report, presnted in outline, about the awful fate of 10 asylum seekers, and 9 children, deported to DRC over the past few years.
I've delayed writing this blog, trying to think of how I coud express the terrible facts that are coming out now information is being gathered and brought together, and veriefied.  I still cannot, it is so terrible, so I will just repeat some words on the front page of the report, of what happened on their return to a supposedly safe country where they are expected to be able to integrate into life there, after fleeing for their life to this country, and then being removed.
Serious concerns; very grave pattern; ill treatment; inhumane and degrading treatment on return; desperately poor living conditions; fear of leaving homes; fear of reprisals; unable to support themsleves and family; outcasts.
It is going to take a lot of money and work to be able to draw up the conclusions into a format that courts will accept as being the situation.

It was then quick change to happy families, and going to our family with a lovcly warm welcome, fun, games, and a nice meal.  I am thankful to have that in my life.  Here is my grandson, Jack with the hockey award that is being shared with his team.

Scandal !

It is raning, cold, and might snow.  On the other hand I should be on the streets meeting people and listening to their problems.   Doing feedback from surveys and sorting out the regional lib dem constituion suddenly became attractive.  Sorry folks - I'll be out next week !
If you are intersted in scandal, have a look at this, and see just how ridiculous things can get.

HOORAY !

At long last Darlington Lane and Darlington Back Lane are going to be resurfaced.  Every single day I get complaints about it, and not sure if it is the worst road in Stockton or the biggest pothole in the world, but work due to begin at last !





In the evening we were at Queen's Campus, John Snow College, and heard D Simon Forrest speak about the "Community Placement Scheme for Queen's Campus Medical School".  Clearly a big help to the organisations in the community, mainly in the voluntary sector, but life changing for the student doctors, to be able to see and understand so much better how people and society work.  The more doctors with this sort of experience the better, and we heard some moving stories about how the placements had made huge changes in the perception and understanding of issue by the students.

Elm Tree Commmunity Centre Youth Club.

Cabinet tonight, and whilst I am not a member, the public (which does include back bench councillors !) are allowed to go along and listen, and if the chair allows can speak.  I was interested in the item on Youth Clubs and spoke out about the planned closure of the Elm Tree youth club.  Not to go into every detail here, but I felt the process of making the decision was flawed, nobody had asked the young people about ability to travel to others.  Also poor value for money when you take into account the fact that the Community Centre has a lot of equipment purchased for use by the Youth Club.
Did they listen ? we will see.

Not much chance for participation !!

The Market Forum was the usually enegetic and vigorous debate with the market traders from Stockton High Street as well as the Thornaby and Billingham Markets.  In some ways this is my favourite Council Committee, back to basics and none of the nonsense we sometimes get elsewhere.  It was revealing to find that there is a "vision" for Stockton that is going to be launched with a consultation on March 3rd.  It will have to end 3 weeks later because of the forthcoming elections.  now am I being cynical, or is there some connection with elections here ? launching a long term vision with a very short time for public to participate and give views ?
What do you think ?
Another fact gleaned.  The Council Annual meeting after the elections sounds as though it is going to be at Wynyard Hall.  A splendid place, no doubt.  It may even work out cheaper when I see the figures.  However - how on earth to the public get there ?  I've spent my time on the Council standing up for openness in decision making - I do wonder does anyone ever, ever listen.

Some positives out of impoosibles

A really positive meeting at Whitehouse Primary School about problems with parents parking illegally and dangerously, causing problems for local residents too.  There are times when I despair, but meeting 2 young pupils who had such good ideas presented on a power point, leaflets, and an outline of a letter - it does raise hope for the future !
Next positive was taking part in a phone conference with Andrew Stunell MP, Lib Dem Minister for Communities and Local Government, on behalf of the Northern Region Lib Dems.  I've known Andrew for many years, and he first came to Stockton in 1983.  The result nearly blew the top off the Town Hall, but advice Andrew gave was right, and has happened in future years.  Tonight, though, was him outlining his responsibities, but typically listening, and doing so very genuinely, taking on board what we had to say, not shirking answering any awkward questions, and giving straighforward answers.
I still do not like much of what comes out of the Pickles Department, but having a better understanding of what Andrew is trying to do and achieving is a huge help.

King's Speech

Don't tell anyone, but we took time off in the afternoon for a visit to the cinema to see "The King's Speech".  It is very rare we go and see a film, but if they were like this might go more often.  A brilliant film, and it it made you think lots.  One thought is - if only everyone with a disability of any sort had someone that would encourage, support, cajole, and stand by them.  If only.   What could be achieved by so many more.
Pity about the horrible smell of sickly popcorn and sight of fast food as we went in, and very noisy adverts of things I wouldn't drean of wanting to see.  excellent outing nonetheless.

A small world and love that makes the world go round

A visit from friends brought full circle.  It was lovely to see Trish and Edward Fortune again after many years.  It was Edward, in February 1974 that spoke at a meeting in Billericay as the Liberal Candidate for Parliament, that first got me involved in the Liberal Party.  I was both interested and inspired, and the rest, as they say, is history.  We had moved to Billericay for John's job, could see there were lots of problems in the world to tackle, and the way Edward spoke I could see hope for the future.  Life has never been the same since - and some things have changed for the better !
As we talked, caught up with our news, and reminsced we realised that Edward had been a young Liberal connected wth Stockton in the 1960's.  Even better he knew our friend and now Middlesbrough Councillor Maelor Williams, and Maelor was the best man for our good friends here, Denis and Maureen Rigg, who were also involved in the Young Liberals in Stockton then.
It really is a small world isn't it.
As the commercial world hypes up for valentine's day, there was a contrast in our household.  My amaryllis has finallly grown and got some lovely magnificent flowers, but so much so it toppled over, and soil and bits are all over the floor.   John is really busy, but takes the time to rescue the flower, get out the vacuum ckeaner, find a stake, and sort out the mess.  That, to me, is a lot more than a bunch of expensive flowers, just bought.
At Church this morning we had our monthly discussion group about a topical subject.  Today it was already interesting about marriage and cohabitation, but added in was the news about the possiblity of  lifting the ban on civil partnerships taking place in religious settings in England and Wales.  Most interesting, I could fill numerous pages writing about this, but things are moving forward, even if not at the pace some would like.  Is moving together more important than moving fast ? discuss !
I've sneaked to the Co-op to buy some Valentine Fairtrade chocolate as a special treat for John tomorrow - they had some left if you read this in time.  Only £1.15 - but the thought that counts - and too much doesn't do any good :-)

humanise or demonise

as the debate goes on about votes for prisoners, and all the intricacies of what the vote means, I do think the point is lost.  Are (most) people in prison there to be punished, and come out again as proper members of our society, or are they to be demonised, whatever they have done ?
Giving them the vote, to me, means that they are treated as human beings, and as adults,  and so far more likely to become good members of our communities on release, and less likely to re-offend.  If we demonise, they are more likely to live up to that reputation.
Then of course there is the very mention of anything with the words "EUR" in and the tabloids are screaming, baying for blood, thinking that anything with the letters "EUR" in means babies get eaten, and completely misunderstanding the whole issue.  But then that isn't a crime to whip up fear and misundestanding.

Policing and health news

Yes, another seminar.  I was pleased, indeeed delighted, to find that although a lot of cuts are having to be made by Cleveland Police, there will still be the police on the frontline, as now, and our PCSO's (Police Community Support Officers) will remain in the same numbers.  It does show that if the aim is to do the best possible to preserve front line action, it is - just - possible.  That does not mean that difficult decisions are not having to be made behind the scenes that will have impact on the public of course.  I do worry somewhat about how our PCSO's are seen.  they do a brilliant job in Bishopsgarth and Elm Tree Ward, nipping problems in the bud, before they get worse, giving out advice and information, and spending time to listen and offer advice to victims.  I've really noticed the difference since they have been around (backed up by an excellent team of PC and Sergeant of course !) but their input would cause big problems if not there, but difficult to measure.
Health is another story.  Although I heard, when I asked, that a non profit making consortium from the PCT is being looked at, so contracts do not have to go out to the private sector, I wonder how speedy that is going on.  Fingers crossed !

The YES campaign in action

A meeting for contacts in the North East tonight in Newcastle was buzzing with ideas for getting over the "YES to FAIRER VOTES" message, contacting people, and setting up events.  Lots of ideas and ready to go.  We popped in on the phone canvassing team, I was surprised how relaxed they looked ! but they were getting good responses on the phone.  No comment on the empty pizza box, but it all looked good fun.

Now if you are likely to be going up and helping and you haven't a satnav, this is the view from outside the building, so you don't get lost like I did - not a good photo but looks good when you are there - you could always go up and join them !

Big Society - will it happen ?

Big Society.  I am not going to try to explain what it means, but I am pretty sure I know what it isn't.  It isn't people having everything done for them, and it isn't anyone doing anything in the community being told exactly how to do it.
The big problem I have is how is it going to work when so many voluntary and community organsations, that will be essential for being part of the delivery of it, are on the point of going under, or making big cuts to greatly reduce capacity.
To say nothing of the reduction in support there could be from those that offer support, advice, and what we call "capacity building" - helping organisations to be able to stand on their own feet.
One the positve side, it looks as though organising a street party for the Royal Wedding is going to be easier with less bureaucracy.  I only said looks as though, but I've found a simple form sent out in the early days of the coaltion, and that should help some residents in the ward that are interested to begin planning.  I would add it here if I could work out how!

STEPS with someone beside us

Today's meeting was at the STEPs part of Stockton Council, described as "a stepping stone approach to employment" where people with different disabilities are supported, encouraged and given confidence on their was to employment.  On their course at STEPS they learn many new skills in a supportive but working environment, and produce some wonderful work.  It is not often that we have the opportunity to meet in the midst of products of the agenda of the meeting, but there were some really good cards made by those who went to the centre. 

Also we were told (but did not get to play with !) confetti in different shapes was made.  An excellent set up, and cards can be purchased at the Baptist Tabernacle shop in Stockton and Preston Hall Museum shop.  I'll be going and stocking up.

Some excellent news came in the midst of our group meeting this morning.  I'll quote from our Eaglescliffe Councillors "Thank you to all who contacted us about the future of the Tees Valley Music Service.  Today the coalition government has announced that for this year
the funding for the music services across the country will be held at the
same level as last year i.e. no increase for inflation.  There will be
consultation on how the services should be run in the future.
This is good news, welcomed by your Eaglescliffe ward councillors, but it is
not quite the end of the story.  Tees Valley Music Service is organised by
Stockton Borough Council but is funded by the four Tees Valley Authorities.
We need councillors and schools in Middlesbrough, Hartlepool and Redcar &
Cleveland to unite with those in Stockton in support of the service otherwise it could still close."

Before ward surgery I did manage a lesson on tackling the intricacies of Windows 7 and Word 2010.  Why it has to be so complicated is beyond me - but a much clearer way of tackling after my lesson with Karen from Compupal, I am pleased to say.  I link back to the STEPS article.  Amazing what we can do if someone can just show is in a nice and pleasant way :-)

The atrocities done in our name.

"Asylum Monologues" was presented today, but was preceded by information on how a dossier has been produced on what has happened to the 10 adults and 5 children that were arrested and removed from Tees Valley and sent back to the very unsafe conditions in the Democratic Republic of Congo.  Work done with Amnesty International has made interviews possible with those that there was still contact with.  What happened to those that left Kinshasha airport.  What happened to them in a country the Government deemed safe to send people fleeing for thier life back to.  The report will be launched later this month, but in the meantime we are proud that those who have suffered so much and endured agony have held their heads up high and made their statements to ensure that no others are sent to such a fate.
ASYLUM MONOLOGUES is real stories of asylum seekers presented by actors.  I cannot convey here how moving and how terrible the stories are.  I will just do a precis of what they said, but there was a theme - the atrocities they suffered in their home country, followed by how they were treated here, in our country, yes our country, but our Government officials who carry out their work in our name.  Yes, our name.  They are doing this on behalf of you and me.  Is it what we want ?

Germaine was from the East Congo.  He was a fully trained teacher, married with a family, earning a living and playing a part in his community.  However when the President was toppled people's rights had to be defended.  The stories were sickening.  Illegal taxes were brought in and if not paid a wife would be raped.  A husband would be forced to have sex with his own children, or shot in front of them.  After terrible violence and his own father being shot, Germaine fled, not even able to be at his own father's funeral.  He landed at Heathrow not even knowing which country he was in.  He was not met with anything like welcome, sympathy or empathy, but a barrage on 288 questions on details of his own country - history and geography, that even an educated person like him could not answeer all of.  His application for asylum was refused.  The long story of his legal battle began, with him defending himself in his broken english.  When he won a case, the judge agreeing with him, the Home Office appealed and won.  The battle went on, he slept rough with no money at all for 4 months.   he found from something on the internet that his mother had been killed and his children held hostage.  Another appeal, whilst he was still without income.  An organisation kindly helped by giving him the £90 fare needed to get to his hearing, and he did win this final appeal giving him the right to stay here in safety.  After years of the threat of being returned he was safe, and he found his wife and family were got out of the Congo to a refugee camp in Malawi, their case heard and they were allowed to go in safety to Australia.  A good ending to the story, but what a battle, what heartache, and how long it all took.  He thanked everyone that had helped him to get his voice heard.
Faye was a 12 year old child who was Ethiopean but her mother was Eritrean.  After a traumatic time of not being able to live in either country in safety they came here.  She settled well in a school and was making friends.  Then early one morning there was a knock on the door and 6 men from the Border Agency were there - "pack up your bags, you aren't coming back".  She was bundled into a van with her mother, and taken to a detention centre, completely bewildered.  What had she done wrong ?  life at the detention centre was terrible, she was upset to find other children had lived there for a year.  A very strict regime with everyone having to be in their rooms by 9 and not allowed out at all.  She was jubilant when they were let out and taken back to the home they were bundled away from.  Back at school with friends she could not settle, being terrified of the knock on the door again.  It happened, and back to the detention centre.  this time they were taken to the airport, but on the way it was found the plane was to go to Ethiopia where she was not allowed to go.  Petitions by school friends had been got up and it was back to the detention centre.  Finally they were given leave to remain in this country, but she cannot forget the terror and trauma.  Her message "no one should be detained in they have done nothing wrong".
I ask myself - is this how a civilised country deals with people.  In my name ?

Marjorie was from Uganda.  She had been a Councillor in her village, representing the women who were being treated very badly.  She was arrested and taken away from her daughter.  She was put in prison and had the pain of not only being raped, but this took place in front of her husband.  It got worse and happened 30 times in one day.  She never saw her husband again and does not know what happened to him.  She was sent to a safe house, but was tortured there, and a baby she wa carrying as a result of the rapes was stillborn because of her rough treatment.  An escape was arranged, 5 of them got through, but 3 were shot dead.
She ended up at Heathrow and like Germaine did not know which country she had arrived at.  Immedately taken to hospital because of the terrible state of her injuries - all recorded - she gave birht to her daughter - a child of the rapings.   She was not granted asylum as she was deemed to be a "low key activist".  In 2004 a judge ruled that she could stay as her human rights had been violated, but this was overturned by the Home Office on appeal.  She entered into one court case after another, finding the mental torture of waiting and constant form filling even worse than her physical scars.  Her message to us was "every small things help".

The final actor was playing someone from United Kingdom Borders Agency, UKBA.  I could see why she was anonymous.  She told us what it was like working at UKBA.  She was firmly told that "nobody was PC here", and her supervisor told her that if he had his way asylum seekers would be taken outside and shot.  In interviews they were encouraged to be rude and dismissive.  there was no cultural awareness training, no mentor, so was left to get on with it with no supervision.
When she interviewed asylum seekers they did not have any legal representative with them, even though they were allowed this - nobody told them they could.
She had a case load that had to have 2 interviews and 2 decision letters a week.  If a case was complicated, tough, just less time to look into it.
There was a "grant monkey".  this monkey was placed on the desk of anyone granting leave to stay to an asylum seeker, as a mark of shame for that worker.  Whistle blowing was very much frowned upon, but it happened and the "grant monkey" was seen no more.
She was asking for a full review of UKBA, like the Macpherson report into the Met Police.  The Home Office has core values, the sort of values that I would want them to have if doing things in my name, but the culture of UKBA is such that they are meaningless.
these people are employed to act in our name to ensure that claims for asylum are dealt with fairly and justly.  They should have been done with compassion too.  We are a civilised country after all.  Are we ?

Seeing the wood for the trees

The nation is in uproar about our forests and woodlands being sold off.  If that was the case then I too would be pretty cross and campaigning and protesting.  However I've done some research, and it is long, but if you feel passionately about the subject please do read on.
One of our MPs has been sending the following out to people.  It certainly puts another side of the picture.

Thank you for contacting me about the issue of Forests.   This is an
important issue to me and it is crucial that we maintain our forests well.
I had a meeting with Caroline Spelman yesterday evening about this issue. 
I highlighted the concerns about access.  She made the point that whereas the previous
government had sold commercial forest land without ensuring public access, the current
government will change the law to make sure access is maintained and only lease out commercial forests.
The key debate and votes will be around the Public Bodies Bill which is the
Bill that would enable controls to be placed upon the handling of forests.
The previous government sold 25,000 acres of forest land.  It is important, however, that commerical developers do not get their hands on Heritage Forests.   Hence we will be stopping that idea completely.
There is also a debate on Wednesday.  This debate, however, will not have the force of law nor will it bind the government.  I have not yet decided which way I will vote on Wednesday, but it is important to remember that this is not the key vote.  The key vote will be in the public bodies bill.
In Acocks Green there is Westley Value Millenium Green.  This is leased to a local group who run it for the community.  I think this scheme works well.
The government's proposals for the heritage forests are similar to this.
I have also been sent a briefing from the government which I copy below for
your information.

HOUSE of Commons, London, SW1 0AA


To: All Coalition MPs

Dear Colleague
27th January, 2011.

Consultation on new models of ownership or management for the Public Forest Estate

Today we have published a consultation paper on the options for ownership or
management of the publicly owned forest estate.  The consultation itself can
be found at www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/forests/index.htm and I
would urge you to read it fully, but in the meantime I thought it would be useful
to summarise the key points in it.
The consultation has been shaped by these over-riding principles:

  a.. To protect and enhance biodiversity
  b.. To maintain public access for recreation and leisure;
  c.. To ensure the continuing role of the woodlands in climate change
mitigation
  d.. To protect nationally important landscapes.

In considering new models of management or ownership, the consultation makes
clear that there is no one-size-fits-all model and any changes will take place in a gradual and considered way such that safeguards and protections can be secured.

The types of woodland held by the State, in the form of the Forestry
Commission, generally fall into the following categories; heritage forests,
small scale local woodlands and large commercially valuable forests.

Summarised below is the approach on which we are consulting for each
category.

Heritage Forests (eg. Forest of Dean, New Forest)
Protecting the public benefits and biodiversity of these forests is of
paramount importance and for these types of forests we are consulting on new
or existing charitable organisations taking on ownership or management of
them.  There will be no sale of Heritage Forests to the commercial or
private sector – and we will bring forward an amendment to the Public Bodies
Bill to give this the force of law.

Smaller scale, local areas of woodland
These types of woodland are extremely valuable in terms of the recreation
and environmental benefits they offer.  Accordingly we will offer first
refusal to community bodies or civil society organisations and give them
preferred status in taking over these sites.  If no such organisation wishes
to take over these sites, we would consider leasing these sites on the open
market, subject to access and environmental safeguards being imposed so
that local people can continue to enjoy them.

Commercial Forests
These forests are primarily, but not solely, used for commercial timber
production.  However, we recognise there are other important considerations
such as their environmental significance and amenity value.  Managing
timber production is not something that needs to be done by the State, so we
propose leasing these sites on the open market, but this will be on a long
lease basis so that conditions for continued public access and other public
benefits can be maintained.

It is understood that in some cases individual sites will be a mix of these
and in recognition of that each woodland would be dealt with on a case by
case basis to see which options are best suited to particular sites.
Clearly local people will have a strong view as to what category woodland
near them falls into, and as you would expect they will have an opportunity
to get involved.

I would also reinforce the point that any land transferred to a new model of
ownership or management will be subject to strict legal controls which are
already in place, including country rights of way protection, planning
restrictions, wildlife conservation laws and felling license requirements
etc.

We have also looked at the 25,000 acre programme of sales that we inherited
from the previous administration and are going to offer greater protections
than before.  Unlike sales that took place previously, we have taken the
decision to prevent the sale of any site in which more than 10% is Planted
Ancient Woodlands (PAWs).  This is important because it is part of a series
of measures we are proposing to recover and regenerate as many PAWs as
possible, other possible measures include using leasehold conditions to
insist on PAWs being replanted, and separating PAW sites from larger
woodland units so that they can be offered to preferred custodians such as
charities like the Woodland Trust.
I believe the proposals in this consultation are an exciting opportunity to
improve the levels of public benefit and environmental protection we give
to our woodlands.  It is consistent with the Government’s Big Society approach
of devolving power from central government down to civil society, and it
puts our forests on a more environmentally and financially sustainable
footing.

As you will be aware, the means by which we can consider transferring
ownership or management of publicly owned forestry would be through the
Public Bodies Bill.  There has been a considerable measure of concern that
the powers in the Bill would permit future administrations to dispose of our
heritage woodlands in a way that does not safeguard access and benefits.  In
order to rule this out, in perpetuity, we are going to bring forward amendments to the Public Bodies Bill which will exempt our heritage forests from commercial sale.

One of the principal reasons the Forestry Commission is unable to remain
unreformed is that in its current position it is both the regulator of the
English timber sector yet also the biggest player in that market.  Given the
importance this Government has attached to transparency and accountability,
it is clearly important that these functions are separated.

Safeguarding access rights, public benefits and environmental protections is
paramount and this consultation not only conserves existing measures, it considerably improves them.

In summary, we are protecting our forests by:

·         Enshrining in law the commitment that no Heritage Forests can be
sold to the private sector.
·         Offering first refusal to community groups or civil society
organisations in sales of local woodland.
·         Guaranteeing access and benefits in any sales of commercial
forests by only selling land on a leasehold basis.
·         Preventing the sale of any site in which more than 10% is Planted
Ancient Woodlands (PAWs).

If you would like any further information please do not hesitate to get in
touch with me or my colleague Jim Paice.

Yours ever


Rt Hon Caroline Spelman MP
Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

Useful points to be aware of:
-       Only 18% of England’s woodlands is managed by the Forestry
Commission, the remainder being owned by various types of organisation (eg
Crown Estate, charities like National Trust, farmers, local authorities)
-       Between 1997 and 2010 there were over 25,000 acres sold with
significantly less access and benefit protections than would be the case
under the options considered in this consultation.
-       Reform of the public forestry estate has been under consideration
for some time under the previous Government, with the 2009 ‘Operational
Efficiency Programme’ detailing “alternatives to public ownership” and “new
commercial opportunities” for the estate.
-       The National Trust is a successful example of where preservation,
access and public benefit of nationally important assets have been
delivered
through a model which is not reliant on state-ownership.
-       The Public Forestry Estate has operated at a net cost of over £10m
each year, with the net cost growing each year since 2007.


Forestry Commission

·         This is an exciting opportunity to improve the levels of public
benefit from our woodlands. Our reforms will devolve management and
ownership of our forests from central government to civil society whilst
safeguarding the access rights and environmental protections that we all
value. It will put our forests on a more environmentally and financially
sustainable footing so that we can work towards increasing the quality as
well as quantity of woodland in England.

·         Labour sold off 25,000 acres of woodland with a bare minimum of
protection. By contrast, we are putting secure safeguards in place to
protect public access, the natural environment and the interests of local
communities in any future sales.

Issue

·         The Public Bodies Bill, published on 29 October 2010, contains
provisions to enable the Government to reform the Forestry Commission,
including the potential for transferring ownership of parts of the Public
Forest Estate to the voluntary or private sectors. The Forestry Commission
manages approximately 620,000 acres of land on behalf of the government,
amounting to 18 per cent of England’s total woodland.

·         The Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
conducted a public consultation on the future of the Forestry Commission
and
the forests it manages. One of the reasons for this is the conflict between
the Forestry Commission’s roles as both the market regulator and the
market’s
largest supplier. The consultation was published on 26 January 2011.

·         The ‘Save England’s Forests’ campaign, led by Rachel Johnson with
support from the Sunday Telegraph, is campaigning against any moves to
transfer ownership of forests. The newspaper has published a letter calling
on the government to retain public ownership of existing estate, signed by
celebrities including Dame Judi Dench, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Annie
Lennox, Dylan Jones, Ben Fogle and Ranulph Fiennes (Sunday Telegraph, 23
January 2010).

Our approach

·         Enhancing our woodland. We are changing rules governing the
Forestry Commission so that the voluntary and private sectors can take a
greater role in the management and ownership of the Public Forest Estate.
Where appropriate we want to transfer ownership to charities, communities
or
enterprises with innovative ideas to make best use of the nation’s
woodland.
This will give individuals, businesses, civil society organisations and
local authorities a much bigger role in protecting and enhancing our
forests
(Defra, Written Ministerial Statement, 27 January 2011).

·         Protecting the nation’s great forests. We are committed to
maintaining in full the public benefits of our Heritage Forests, which
include the Forest of Dean, New Forest, Sherwood Forest. Therefore, there
will be no sale of our Heritage Forests to the commercial or private
sector.
We are tabling an amendment to the Public Bodies Bill in order to enshrine
this principle in law (Defra, Written Ministerial Statement, 27 January
2011).

·         Protecting the interests of local communities. When areas of
woodland important to local communities are considered, we will give the
right of first refusal to community groups or civil society organisations.
This will ensure local communities are not bypassed where ownership of
woodland is transferred from the public estate. Leasehold conditions will
ensure access rights (Defra, Written Ministerial Statement, 27 January
2011).

·         Withdrawing the State from the management of timber production.
Many areas of woodland in the Public Forest Estate are used for timber
production. There is no reason why a public body should be closely involved
in timber production. We therefore propose selling these sites on the open
market. This will be on a leasehold basis of 150 years so that conditions
for continued public access and replanting can be guaranteed (Defra,
Written
Ministerial Statement, 27 January 2011).

·         Protecting public access. We will place safeguards on land
transferred from the public forest estate. The sale of woodland to
commercial investors will be conditional upon guaranteeing public access,
not least for local communities (Defra, Written Ministerial Statement, 27
January 2011).

·         Protecting the natural environment. We will prevent the sale of
any site where more than 10 per cent of land is classified as Planted
Ancient Woodlands (PAWs). In addition, any land sold to commercial
investors
will be sold on a leasehold basis of 150 years, ensuring conditions for
replantation can be guaranteed (Defra, Written Ministerial Statement, 27
January 2011).

·         Ensuring the independence of the regulator. The Forestry
Commission is both the regulator for forests and the manager, on behalf of
the government, of a huge proportion of the nation’s forests. By
transferring ownership from the public forest estate, the commission will
be
able to focus on its role as regulator (Defra, Written Ministerial
Statement, 27 January 2011).

·         Sale of 15 per cent of the estate confirmed. The Government will
initially transfer ownership of 15 per cent of the woodland managed by the
Forestry Commission, with net receipts to Defra totalling £74.5 million:
‘the Forestry Commission estimates selling 15 per cent of the public forest
estate over the spending review period, approximately 40,000 hectares. The
estimate of net receipts from sales, year on year, is £13 million/£18
million/£20.5 million/£23 million’ (Hansard, 2 December 2010, Col. 960W).

Political points to make

·         Labour sold off 25,000 acres of forest but failed to protect
access. Labour sold off 25,000 acres of forest with far less stringent
protections on public access than those we will introduce. We will ensure
woodland used by local communities continues to be available, that Heritage
Forests will not be sold to the private sector and that land transferred to
commercial investors is sold on the basis of a 150-year leasehold, with
conditions on public access and replantation (Defra, Written Ministerial
Statement, 27 January 2011).

·         Labour was looking at ‘new commercial opportunities’ for the
forest estate. The previous government included the Public Forest Estate in
its Operational Efficiency Programme (OEP). This considered ‘for a number
of
government assets, the potential for alternative business models,
commercialisations, new market opportunities and, where appropriate,
alternatives to public ownership.’ This included ‘considering how the
Public
Forest Estate in England can generate greater commercial benefit’ (HM
Treasury, Operational Efficiency Programme: final report, April 2009).

·         Labour explored more private sector investment in the forest
estate. The Labour government also conducted a study to ‘show how
individual
woods help deliver the Government’s objectives and contribute financially,
and where they offer new commercial opportunities.’ The document went on:
‘Public Forest Estate offers a potential opportunity for private sector
investors to generate long-term stable returns’ (HM Treasury, Operational
Efficiency Programme: Asset Portfolio, 7 December 2009).

·         Labour admitted the future of the estate had to be considered in
light of reduced public spending. The OEP admitted: ‘The scope of the
estate
is constrained by reduced public spending, and obligations to Government
policies which are increasing net operating costs’ (HM Treasury,
Operational
Efficiency Programme: Asset Portfolio, 7 December 2009).

·         Public Forest Estate consistently operating at a loss of over £10
million per year. The Forestry Commission’s corporate plan for 2009-2012
shows the following operating losses for the public forest estate: £14.8
million in 2007/08, £11.8 million in 2008/09, £11.9 million in 2009/10,
£12.4 million in 2010/11 and £13.3 million in 2011/12 (Forestry Commission
England, Corporate Plan 2009-2012,
http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/eng-corporateplate-0912.pdf/$FILE/eng-corpor
ateplate-0912.pdf)

·         Income from the estate will only cover 71 per cent of expenditure
in 2010-11: ‘£49m or 71% of gross operating expenditure in 2010/11 is
expected to be covered by income from the estate including timber sales and
recreation’ (Forestry Commission, The Forestry Commission Estate in
England).

·         Charitable and private ownership of forests is not new. Nearly 70
per cent of England’s forests are already in private ownership and deliver
a
wide range of benefits. The Forestry Commission only manages 18 per cent of
England’s woodland (Defra, Letter to MPs, 29 October 2010).

·         Expert analysis commissioned by the Forestry Commission noted
ownership is not the only determinant of public benefit: ‘It is important
to
note that many of the products and services are also provided by woodlands
in other ownership. To a greater or lesser extent these benefits are
dependent on management practices, and any differences in values of the
products and services are the result of forest structure and management,
not
of ownership per se. Other landowners who manage for multiple objectives,
encourage access, and so on, will also create significant product and
service values’ (Economics for the Environment Consultancy, The Economic
Contribution of the Public Forest Estate in England, 11 January 2010).

The Labour line

Mary Creagh, Shadow Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Secretary: ‘We are
concerned developers will cherry pick the most profitable land and we will
see huge pressure for development in sensitive places. The environment is
going to pay a high price for its settlement in the recent spending
review.’

Our response: Labour don’t have a leg to stand on – they were selling off
our forests with hardly any protection for public access and were known to
be considering similar proposals themselves. By contrast, we will make sure
the current forest estate remains open for public use regardless of who
owns
it. Furthermore, the Forestry Commission will continue to regulate tree
felling and statutory protection for access and wildlife will remain.

Hostile questions

Q: Why have you decided to get rid of the forests?
We are not abolishing forests. We have looked at a range of new ownership
options that secure the best future for our woodlands. We will ensure
public
access and benefits and protect our wildlife heritage. The difference
between us and the previous Labour Government is that they sold off 25,000
acres of forest with hardly any protections.

Q: Are you abolishing the Forestry Commission?
The Forestry Commission is not being abolished. It will continue to play an
important role in protecting and improving the trees, woods and forests in
England. We are however correcting the anomaly of having a market’s
regulator also managing a huge proportion of the same market.

Q: Who will you sell woodland to?  Will you sell it all too large energy
companies?
Heritage forests will not be sold to private or commercial investors – this
principle will be enshrined in law. Local woodland may only be sold to
commercial investors if local communities and civil society organisations
do
not exercise their first right of refusal. Public access will be ensured in
such cases. Woodland used for commercial purposes may be sold to private
investors – but only on a 150-year leasehold basis, so that public access
and replantation are guaranteed.

Q: Why do we not need a national forest anymore?
The public forest estate was set up in 1919 in response to the need to
rebuild and maintain a strategic timber reserve. The exploitation of
woodland during the Second World War led to renewed efforts to rebuild
timber stocks, including the acquisition of many felled and derelict
woodlands in England. Now England’s forests and woodlands provide a wide
range of public benefits from outdoor recreation to acting as a carbon
sink.
But these benefits do not need to be provided through state ownership.
Nearly 70 per cent of England’s forests are already in private ownership
and
deliver a wide range of benefits. The Government wants to increase the
standards of all of England’s forests, whilst reducing its role as a major
land owner. That is what our proposals achieve.

NEW DRAFT 25 JANUARY 2010

Press Notice

New direction for England’s public forest estate
England’s best known historic forests will be protected for future
generations under proposals announced by Environment Secretary Caroline
Spelman today. The transfer of heritage forests such as the New Forest and
the Forest of Dean to charitable trusts will mean walkers, riders and
cyclists will still be able to enjoy them as they do at the moment.
The proposals are contained in a consultation document on the ownership and
management of the 18% of England’s woodland currently run by the Forestry
Commission.  The document lays out different approaches for different types
of woodlands.

The plans make clear that these woodlands will not simply be sold off to
the
highest bidder. Instead they recognise that no two woodlands are the same
and that no single ownership model is appropriate. The document suggests a
mixed approach that would deliver benefits for users and taxpayers, and
makes clear that public access and biodiversity will be protected.  The
government will bring forward amendments to the Public Bodies Bill to
ensure
the public benefits the forests provide are protected.

The key proposals in the consultation document are that:

·         Heritage and community forests which provide high public benefits
will be protected by inviting new or existing charitable organisations to
take on ownership or management.

·         There will be opportunities created for community and civil
society groups to buy or lease forests.

·         Commercially valuable forests will be leased to commercial
operators. Leasing rather than selling will allow the lease conditions to
ensure that the public benefits of these woodlands are preserved while
allowing the operators to maximise their commercial potential.

These changes of ownership will allow the Forestry Commission to focus on
its key roles of responding to outbreaks of tree pests and diseases,
regulating felling and setting standards for sustainable forest management.
The proposals would remedy the situation where the Commission is the
largest
commercial operator in the sector it also regulates.

The Government has already committed to taking 15% of the public forest
estate out of state control over the course of this parliament, generating
up to £100million of receipts. The consultation paper launched today
invites
views on a range of ownership and management options for the remaining 85%
of the estate.  This will be an open consultation and Government will
listen
to all responses before publishing its response in the summer.

Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman said:

“State control of forests dates back to the First World War, when needs
were
very different. There’s now no reason for the Government to be in the
business of timber production and forest management. It’s time for the
Government to step back and allow those who are most involved with
England’s
woodlands to play a much greater role in their future.

“We want to move from a ‘Big Government’ approach to a ‘Big Society’ one,
so
that we can give different groups – individuals, businesses and civil
society organisations – the opportunity to be involved in managing the
natural environment.  And we will make sure that public access is
maintained
and biodiversity protected.”

On amending the Public Bodies Bill, Mrs Spelman said:

“The government is absolutely committed to the ongoing provision and
protection of the public benefits provided by the public forest estate, and
the consultation shows how we intend to achieve this. We will bring forward
amendments to the Public Bodies Bill to create a strengthened framework to
safeguard the natural and social capital our forests provide now and for
future generations. This would apply to the powers of sale, lease and
management of the public forest estate. The consultation proposes that
conditions will be attached to leases so that access and other public
benefits are protected.”

The public forest estate makes up 18% of all woods and forests and 2% of
the
total land in England. The estate delivers a wide range of important public
benefits, which will be protected, such as supporting biodiversity, storing
carbon, supplying timber and energy and providing access to green space for
recreation and employment opportunities.  The Forestry Commission has long
bought and sold land but any woodland sold under the new proposals would
benefit from increased protection.

Pam Warhurst, Chair of the Forestry Commission, said:
"Ministers have set out a new vision for forestry in England that will
require a fundamental shift in our thinking and how we work. The proposals
provide an opportunity to think about forest ownership and sustainable land
management in a new way and to engage a wider cross-section of society. The
consultation will allow people to have their say and we encourage everyone
with an interest to give us their views."
The Forestry Commission will continue to provide expertise on a wide range
of tree-related matters, including tree health, the environmental role of
woodlands, the links with climate change mitigation and adaptation, and the
social and economic benefits of forestry.

Reform of the public forestry estate is expected to take place over the
next
decade with the Government’s overall policy approach to domestic forestry
being set out in the Natural Environment White Paper in spring 2011.
Notes to editors:
1.     The consultation will run from 27 January 2011 to 21 April 2011.
Details of the consultation can be found here:
www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/forests/index.htm.

2.     The proposals set out in the consultation are designed to protect
public and environmental benefits:
a)    We will secure continuing good stewardship by requiring adherence to
internationally recognised standards of sustainable forest management as
part of any leasing arrangements. These standards cover in particular,
woodland design, conservation and enhancement of biodiversity and the
well-being of local communities and forestry workers;
b)    Statutory rights of way and dedications under the right to roam
legislation will remain in place. Where there is currently permissive
access, for example by bike and horse, we will seek to secure equivalent
rights as part of any transfer to new owners and managers;
c)    The Forestry Commission’s felling regime will remain in place,
alongside the presumption of replanting. Any change of use will be subject
to strict controls under the planning system. It is simply wrong to suggest
that our forests will be chopped down for housing development or conversion
into golf courses; and
d)    We will seek to agree the continuing restoration of plantations on
ancient woodland sites (PAWS) with any new owners and managers.


  3.. There are numerous safeguards in place which will ensure that public
benefits provided by our woods and forests are protected if they pass into
private ownership.  These safeguards include:

·         regulations governing felling and replanting;
·         protection for biodiversity through the Wildlife and Countryside
Act and Sites of Special Scientific Interest;
·         incentives to protect ancient woodland;
·         guarantees for public access – the majority of the freehold areas
of the public forestry estate are protected for access on foot by the
Countryside and Rights of Way Act;
·         protection of ancient monuments is overseen by English Heritage;
·         any proposals for development would be subject to the Town and
Country Planning process; and
·         Biosecurity - the Plant Health Act sets out a legal framework for
the control of pests and diseases of forest tress and timber.

  4.. The Forestry Commission has always bought and sold land to achieve
operational efficiency. In last ten years, they have sold 7,800ha and
acquired 5,400ha of woodland.

5.    Selling 15% of the public forest estate is part of Defra’s Spending
Review settlement and will help to contribute to tackling the deficit.  The
sites that will be sold will be woodlands where Forestry Commission
activity
adds the least in enhanced public benefit and do not contribute significant
revenue to the running of the estate.

6.    Any forest or wood for which a suitable offer cannot be achieved will
continue to be part of the publicly owned forest estate.

  7.. This consultation focuses on the public forest estate in England. The
woodland managed by the Forestry Commission in Wales and Scotland is the
responsibility of the Welsh Assembly Government and the Scottish Government
respectively and is not subject to this consultation.

McKenzie Thorpe at the Mayor's Ball

Tonight's Mayor's Ball had an unusual turn on the menu.  Local born McKenzie Thorpe had donated a specially signed picture to be auctioned "see you Monday, George".  This was chosen by the Mayor because of his great interest in cycling, and he could remember cycling home from work in the 1950's -as did everyone in those days - on a Friday night and saying "see you Monday".  £1,200 was raised, a brilliant result for the generous offer.

We were very lucky to have some representatives of the Arthaus gallery in Richmond on our table, so able to find out a lot more about him and his work. A very welcome addition to the Ball (for us anyway!) was an escape from the loud music to a room set aside for an exhibition of his works.  Really good, we look forward to a trip to Richmond (the Yorkshire one of course!) to see more.

HEALTH and WELL BEING

We all want "Health and Well Being" don't we.  How to achieve is another matter of course.  We've had the Board dealing with this as part of our Local Strategic Partnership for some years now, but I have felt it frustrating that we are there to deliver a Government agenda as to what priorities are and how to tick the right boxes.  Excuse me - but Stockton is not Westminster, and we have different issues, and ways of measuring success are not necesarily meaningful at all.
So this morning there was a seminar on how the new Government proposals in the "Public Health White Paper" was going to impact on us locally.  I was pleased that the overall views that I picked up on in the groups I was in was not a winge that things were changing, but a very positive look at what opportunities were there for us to pick up and take, so we can really make a difference to long standing problems of "health and well being" locally.

A good death ?

A good death, not a cheerful title - or is it  ? Death is part of life.  A presentation tonight really made me think about how we view preparation for death, and make it part of not only how we deliver services, but how how whole society reacts to death.   Where does it take place, is it where people want, is the right support given to people and their loved one's in the last years, weeks and hours of their life. 
We found that as a result of research and consultation 61% of deaths in Stockton take place in hospital, but that is where only 15% prefer it to be.  Death has been increasingly "medicalised", but has that all been a good thing ?  How much are care homes prepared to look after someone whilst they die, instead of sending people to hospital to die ? How much are all deaprtments of the hospital prepared and trained to do what can best be done to prepare someone for a good death ?  how much can employers help by supporting carers with flexible working whilst someone they care for is dying ?  is there really seamless care between health and social services ? Are even prepared to talk about death of each other and ourselves ?
Lots and lots of questions, and no easy answers, but I am sure that all of this needs to be thought about, and indeed talked about, as plans of any sort are made by public bodies as well as our own.
In the meantime why not have a look at "please consider my wishes" and take the opportunity to spread the word that it will be a help to all if it is looked at, talked about, and even filled in ?

Living Water

An old friend from "Respond!" days, Enid Johnson, has written a sequel, LIVING WATER, to her first book, LAND OF DREAMS.  The book is about her days as a missionary in Africa with her dear late husband Kingsley.  The book signing was as Stockton library, and it was a pity I only had time to pop in quickly, and pay for the book for her to sign and me pick up later.  I look forward to reading it.

Transporting to the future

Good news on some transport issues at a meeting today.  Eaglesliffe Station (near where we live) is getting a revamp, with 77 much needed new parking spaces, a ticket office and some proper facilities.  Great, after years of campaigning by Lib Dem Eaglescliffe Councillors for improvements.
Thornaby station is at long last gettng its horrible old bridge is going at last.  Delays by Network Rail have meant that a grant has been lost, but owing to the lie of the land the ramps could have been too long anyway, so the access out of the station to Mandale Road is being upgraded and made disabled friendly.  I was campaigning for something to be done in 2001 - only 10 years I suppose, even with modern transport things move slowly !
No progress on Billingham station being made.

It is the Transporter Bridge's 100th anniversary this year.  There is a consultation and information youo might want to look at and take part in.  We need to look at ways of making it clear that the Transporter Bridge is not just a Middlesbrough Bridge - it does come over to Stockton !  Ways of celebrating this interesting and almost unique (the only other one in the country is in Newport) piece of engineering.  The first time I came near it I nearly drove into the river - we had only lived in the area a few months, and how was I to know the bridge over the river was not a bridge in the usual sense !
With more aplomb I was privileged to be going over as Mayor many years later as part of a Fairtrade publicity event !