Following your comments on this page is interesting. Its amazing just how many people support this issue and yet it is becoming apparent just how unimportant our views seem to be. Many of your comments are aimed towards the City of London and its governance of the forest. I think it is important to remember that the City of London were entrusted the forest to keep it on our behalf and in that respect they have and do have an important roll to play. What is apparent is the disparity between public perception of claims and rights to the forest and the actual rights and claims. The Forest from what I can tell claimed charitable status in 1964. At this point we became beneficiaries of the charity. We get what we are given. No more no less. In this day and age public demand for accountability and governing bodies recognition of such has become somewhat of a daily news topic. This does not seem to apply to this matter because there is no obligation for a charity to consult or answer to its beneficiaries except in the interests of good public relations. The point we have proved is that the importance of good public relations is not as high on the list as we may be under the impression it was, Income is the deciding factor. Our forest has survived on its own for a millennia, local towns and villages history is entwined with it at times we have supported it and at others it has supported us. It has historically supported us with fuel and shelter and we have supported it by claiming it back from land lords and even having it awarded to the people by the crown. The list of consultees that have an opportunity to speak for their relative groups with the management of the forest is exhaustive and wide ranging yet there is a failure now becoming obvious because thousands and thousands of people are speaking and yet no one is listening. No one actually has to listen. This I believe to be wrong. I believe it is time now for the relationship between the people and the managers of the forest to be scrutinised and rebalanced in a manner where there is opportunity for the public as a whole to have an ability to question direction and control. In essence to become the people again not just beneficiaries of a charity. Cold hard cash is the deciding factor here and this Tea hut has become an issue where it is a market test. The only real power we have is within that market test as consumers and the only decision is where we spend our money. A golden opportunity was missed this week between the Epping Forest registered charity and the people who use the forest. That is such a shame. Essentially the forest has become market driven rather than a natural asset of the people. Our last right to exercise is that of a consumer.
Posted on: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 06:32:00 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015