As the Guardian has noted this morning:
Labour has U-turned on its pledge to create a Scottish-style right to roam in the English countryside if elected, the Guardian can reveal.
Instead of an assumed right of access, the party now says it will find other ways to create more access to land in England, after opposition from some landowners' groups.
In summary, I suspect that some landowners (call them game-shooters) said they weren't happy about this at one of those many meetings Labour had with business at its conference and surprise, surprise, Labour's rolled over again.
As the article also notes:
A Labour party spokesperson said: “Let me be clear that under Keir Starmer's leadership, Labour has never committed to a Scottish-style right to roam. We want people from every background to have responsible access to nature around them, with access to parks and wildlife and the opportunity to enjoy our great British countryside.”
Anyone who starts with '"Let me be clear" has something to hide. In this case, it is yet another U-turn to protect the rights of vested interests.
This is getting really tedious.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Well, in the future, when we have all understood that we don’t need as many people anymore to do stuff, and everything is owned by the rich who grabbed it all in the moments I am writing this, the only people walking around may well be the owners anyway.
That is the direction of travel we are on.
Let me be clear – they DID announce this as a policy. Let me be clear again – they are as big a set of liars as the Tories. A final point of clarity – almost every Labour policy, determined largely by debate and vote in a pseudo-democratic forum (Conference), has been subverted, ignored, overturned or lied about since Starmer took over.
Quite so
“We want people from every background to have responsible access to nature around them, with access to parks and wildlife and the opportunity to enjoy our great British countryside.”……but only if they are landowners.
There, sorted. Tory2, same as Tory1, different faces, same policies, same imbecilic smiles.
UK serfs give Tory2 a landsilde election result and then express unhappiness at the non-result.
Thank you, Richard.
One of the movers behind that is https://www.henrytufnell.com/. https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/english-candidate-whose-family-second-26849308 and https://nation.cymru/news/concerns-raised-as-welsh-labour-selects-candidate-with-no-local-connections-to-stand-at-general-election/ provide more detail.
Tufnell’s ancestors owned and later developed and parcelled Tufnell Park. The streets around there are named after their relatives.
Tufnell and his wife Poppy have a quadruple barreled surnames, but have truncated them as these names may not go down well in the so-called people’s party.
Other movers in this u-turn include the Falconer family, landowners at Thoroton in Nottinghamshire and soon to be represented in the Commons, at neighbouring Lincoln, by scion Hamish.
That elite are more than happy with a Labour victory. It gives the impression of change, but nothing of substance will change. One can expect more as Barclays and HSBC and, to a lesser extent, Citi, Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan have teamed up with Blair’s consulting arm to write Labour policy.
Why have Tory2 selected a child? (the photo in the Walesonline link) – I appreciate that they have negative talent – but picking children – seems to me a new low point.
Who knows, perhaps he is an expert on the Telly Tubbies or some such. Ah well, I’ll be in that neck of the woods soon – think I’ll do some campaiging for him “Vote Tufnell for more telly Tubbies”, “Tufnell as the first child MP” etc.
They have form! I thought exactly the same with their candidate for the Selby by- election!
https://selbyandainsty.laboursites.org/keir-mather-mp/
Emphasis on “great British” – memo from official Labour spokesperson: “we must always promote ‘great British’, and make sure the union jack is on all Labour promo things as well”.
Trying to reinvent a country that died in the 1970s and 1980s with the ending of the postwar consensus, and one that despite ‘great British-ism’ (or ‘Ukania’ as the late great Tom Nairn called it), cannot really be revived with growing calls for Scottish and Welsh independence. The centrifugal forces are too great for Anglo-British nationalism to build revive and cement a nation without a junking of neoliberalism.
(‘Ukania’ is always tricky with international football tournaments – world cup and the Euros – where ‘UK’ and ‘GB’ don’t exist. See Mark Perryman’s excellent work.)
It is indeed ‘getting tedious’.
I just walk wherever I want or can. There are still many ‘rights of way’ not yet registered – even under the present setup.
Guy Shrubsole and co on https://www.righttoroam.org.uk/ won’t give up, but Labour maybe ought to change its name…….?
It’s impiortant to remmeber that there is a right to roam in the UK. If it is not obvious you cannot enter you can and if asked to leave can do so by any convenient route. Only then are you not alloowed to return.
My neighbour told me she had taken her dog for a walk along a footpath in a field, and was stopped by a farmer with a shotgun in her hands. She was told that there were shooters in that field quite regularly, so she ought to be careful.
Doesn’t take her dog through that field anymore, but she is sure there was a right of way marker.
I suggest that it may be a good idea the test the shooting estate lands for lead. I expect the afte many years of firing lead shot the lands are now a bio hazard.
Is there enough lead?
There is in the game they shoot. I never went near it even when I ate that type of meat – which I no longer do.
https://phys.org/news/2023-02-voluntary-uk-phase-toxic-shot.html
Supposed to have been phased out voluntarily, but it hasn’t been.
I wonder if, come the election, Labour will make any attempt at all to tempt the progressive/left-leaning/green-minded voter? What crumbs might they toss from the table?
Nothing at all: Labour is only seeking the Tory voter. They assume the rest have nowhere else to go.
The rest have nowhere else to go – until they jump ship to the Greens and Lib Dems when things get testy for Starmer.
It is indeed a marriage of convenience at the moment, and progressive left voters have plenty of places to go after Labour.
On the ground people are endeavouring to ensure right to roam, right to swim… lots of local groups…direct action – largely unreported in Mainstream Media but on social media, when the logarithms allow…. https://www.righttoroam.org.uk/everybody-welcome
Thanbks
“ensure right to roam, right to swim”
Below are some very stupid question but remember, I am a Yank.
Under “Right-to-Roam”, if you choose to roam then swim in a pond/lake on my property and you get “gobbled-up” by the Loch Ness Monster or loose a leg to an alligator, can you sue me in a court-of-law if I have not posted a warning that my pond/lake may be dangerous? This could (and has) happen(ed) in the USA.
Under “Right-to-Roam”, if a camper damages my bothy or rain shed, can I sue the camper in a court-of-law for damage to my private property? This could (and has) happen(ed) in the USA.
What happens if you are roaming on my actively in cultivation pastoral farmland and you get attacked by my unhappy raging bull? Can you sue me in a court-of-law if I have not posted a warning that a bull is actively present and the area may be dangerous? This could (and has) happen(ed) in the USA.
Are there limits to “Right-to-Roam” on non-public footpaths?
There is a good explanation of the Scottish law on this here
This was to be the basis for the English law
https://shepwedd.com/sites/default/files/The%20right%20to%20roam%20rights%20and%20responsibilities.pdf
Richard,
Thank you so much.