James Duddridge, Member of Parliament for Rochford and Southend East, provides a question and answer session following the Government announcements regarding the forestry estate.
Q. Isn’t this a U-turn?
It shows that this Government listens.
The public are less interested in trying to apply labels like ‘U-turn’, and are more interested to know that they have a Government which listens to them.
We have apologised for not getting it right the first time round. But the important thing now is to make sure we follow the right path, on the advice of this independent panel. This will ensure we have the best future for our woodlands.
Q. How did you manage to misjudge the public mood?
Some of the clauses in the Public Bodies Bill raised fears that the Government was planning to sell off the whole of the forestry estate to the highest bidder – although this was never our intention. Those clauses are now coming out of the Bill, to allay once and for all those fears.
Q. What does this mean for ‘Big Society’?
This whole debate is about securing the best future for our woodlands. Asking the experts and stakeholders about what that future should look like, and who is best placed to deliver it is exactly the point about moving away from ‘big government’ trying to dictate all the answers.
Q. What was the point of all this anyway/have you given up doing anything about forests?
We have announced the independent panel. The status quo lacks ambition about what we can really achieve to better protect and enhance our forests. For example, the Woodland Trustare particularly keen to increase the speed of restoration of ancient woodland on sites planted with conifers.
PUBLIC BODIES BILL
Q. How are you making sure that the Public Bodies Bill doesn’t give you the power to sell off the forests.
We will be supporting existing amendments to withdraw the forestry clauses from the Public Bodies Bill.
PANEL
Q. Why do you need a panel if you’re dropping the consultation? Does this mean that you’re still trying to sell off our forests by a different route?
It was never our intention to sell off the forests to the highest bidder. And of course it is not the task of the panel to do that.
This is now a better way to take forward the broader debate on the future of forestry. Wide engagement with stakeholders is the best way to bring forward a range of options to improve our forests.
Q. If you have stopped the consultation, does this mean there won’t ever be any sale of forestry land?
We will look at the advice given to us by the panel in due course.
Q. How long is the panel going to look at this for?
The panel is likely to report in the Autumn.
Q. What’s the end product of this panel?
The panel will decide how it wishes to present its advice to the Secretary of State.
Q. Who will be on the panel?
It will be made of the experts who are best placed to advise us on the future of our forests. We’ve undertaken to give the House a Written Statement on the full membership of the panel as soon as it is decided.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Q . You were counting on £400 million from sales of the whole public forests estate. What does this mean for the DEFRA budget?
The proposals were expected to take 10 years to implement. As this was a genuinely open consultation and no decisions had been taken, receipts had not been factored into Defra’s spending plans, which in any event, were unlikely to have accrued in the current spending review period.
15% SALES
Q. What happens to the 15% of forests you were going to sell off – is their sale off the cards for the duration of this review by the panel?
We will await the findings of the panel when it comes back to us.
Q. What are you going to do about the hole in your budget caused by halting the sell-off?
The sales have been suspended. They may go ahead at a later date. That’s for the panel to look at. But we have sufficient flexibility to manage this change in budgets over the full Spending Review period.