The Sea Cat
|
Edited Oct 25, 2010, 12:03
Re: Living Heritage Threat
Oct 25, 2010, 12:03
|
|
nigelswift wrote: I can actually prove it's corrupt favouritism:
Logically, planning permission on woodland or a barn represents a lump of value entirely created by us, the community, with the stroke of a pen. No-one earned it or deserves it, so logically it should be subject to a 100% Development Tax, yes? So why isn't that being proposed?
That's an excellent point!
|
tjj
|
Edited Oct 25, 2010, 22:33
Re: Living Heritage Threat
Oct 25, 2010, 21:29
|
|
The Sea Cat wrote:
Just to say thanks for highlighting this TSC - I answered this morning briefly as was about to turn my laptop off for the day. Like many, many, people I feel a deep connection with woodland and forests, ancient or otherwise. This government is becoming increasingly despised; I read somwhere they are offering to put the state pension up to £140 ??? What the f*ck is that all about just a few days after they've told everyone they'll basically have to work till they drop - no doubt something to placate the 'baby boomers' as they slip in to retirement. I imagine there are quite a few latent anachists and ex-revolutionaries out there who have both the energy, resources and time to challenge this government in a Big Way (better keep them quiet).
I had a day out today in a lovely and leafy part of the world - the Cotswolds; we were held up by the small picturesque village of Rodmarton by a hunt preparing to set off. They all smiled at us in thanks for 'giving way' (as though we had a choice) - I just felt contempt for them and their 'class'. I'll contact the Woodland Trust in the next day or two and find out what their stance on this is ... and promise this is not just another forum post to be quickly forgotten - this land is my land too. Indeed.
best wishes
tjj
|
Kozmik_Ken
|
Re: Living Heritage Threat
Oct 25, 2010, 22:41
|
The Tories are having a field day at the moment. They are like very rich kids in a sweet shop. Fulfilling every ideological ambition that has lain dormant since 1997 (dismantling the welfare state and selling off what little the nation still owns) using the deficit as a universal excuse.
This move is particularly low. And I worry what next? Selling off the national parks maybe?
So yes - this does have a bearing on monuments, as once the land is in private hands, it will either be developed or free access barred. I dread to think how much heritage we will lose.
|
megadread
|
Re:Bit O/T but relevant
Oct 25, 2010, 23:07
|
|
Benny Rothman will be turning in his grave if we stand by and let this happen.
|
drewbhoy
|
Edited Oct 26, 2010, 01:45
Re: Living Heritage Threat
Oct 26, 2010, 00:40
|
|
The Sea Cat wrote:
Sometimes the good ghuys and ghirls win.
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/1786969?UserKey=
We didn't give up and still fighting Trump as well!
Ta ra for a wee while. back soon!
|
moss
|
Edited Oct 26, 2010, 06:47
Re: Living Heritage Threat
Oct 26, 2010, 05:43
|
Well news is what I do, so there is opposition out there, the one lone green party MP Caroline Lucas is speaking out against it, calling it "environmental vandalism" which it is of course.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/oct/24/forests-government-heritage-private-developers
And for those who want to see the 'hunting class' in action, try this at Slaughterford... Its on Brian May's SAVE ME site...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meXZAotDfMA
its 8 minutes long, but these are some of the brainless people who vote and take care of our countryside!
|
nigelswift
|
Edited Oct 26, 2010, 09:38
F/T (Fox topic)
Oct 26, 2010, 08:34
|
Nice people. Don't like being photographed eh? I wonder why?
Supporters of hunting are such bare faced liars, here's my local MP in the paper about what he was told on the doorsteps:
"the impression I got was that a very few people felt passionately and when they did, passion was evenly divided between those who felt strongly in favour of hunting and those who felt strongly against. "
Evenly divided?
99.9% of people round here don't go hunting. Why would half of them be strongly in favour of it?
PS, I've just realised it's tricky wording isn't it? "Those who are passionate are split 50-50" which enables him to avoid mentioning that those who are less passionate are still overwhelmingly anti-hunting - and on that basis he's going to vote to repeal the Hunting Act.
|
Sanctuary
|
Re: F/T (Fox topic)
Oct 26, 2010, 09:46
|
|
nigelswift wrote: Nice people. Don't like being photographed eh? I wonder why?
Supporters of hunting are such bare faced liars, here's my local MP in the paper about what he was told on the doorsteps:
"the impression I got was that a very few people felt passionately and when they did, passion was evenly divided between those who felt strongly in favour of hunting and those who felt strongly against. "
Evenly divided?
99.9% of people round here don't go hunting. Why would half of them be strongly in favour of it?
PS, I've just realised it's tricky wording isn't it? "Those who are passionate are split 50-50" which enables him to avoid mentioning that those who are less passionate are still overwhelmingly anti-hunting - and on that basis he's going to vote to repeal the Hunting Act.
Don't get me going on fox hunting as I despise it to its roots. I had a run in with a toffee nosed b*stard here on the edge of Bodmin Moor who I found cutting down the sheep netting to a pals land so that the dogs could get in. He spoke to my mate like he was a bit of dirt on his boot yet in hard cash terms he was a pauper compared to Kenny. His sheer arrogance was astounding with even the two 'ladies' who were with him thinking he was a prick!
|
moss
|
Re: Living Heritage Threat
Oct 26, 2010, 09:58
|
|
The Sea Cat wrote: Is it legal to hunt Otis Ferry ?
Yes, heaven help us what those public schools turn out! his father should be ashamed ;)
|
The Sea Cat
|
Re: Living Heritage Threat
Oct 26, 2010, 10:02
|
|
Is it legal to hunt Otis Ferry ?
|
