ONE thing is missing from all the words from the Government, the local MP and even local Conservative councillors over government proposals for our forests. It's the answer to the simplest, yet most fundamental question: why is the government making these proposals?

•Is it to raise money? Apparently not. If all Mark Harper's assurances – that building, inappropriate and tacky developments, total clearance, quarrying and so on can't happen, and that existing public access will remain – can be believed, business interests are unlikely to be eager to invest. Selling the entire 1.1 million hectares of our English forest might not even raise £2 billion – less than a twentieth of one year's defence budget, or just a small one-off dent in the budget deficit. And how would local authorities or local interests find even that kind of money?

•Is it because the Forestry Commission is badly run or too costly to maintain? Not likely, since the plan seems to be to keep it, so we'd need some very convincing evidence on costs and efficiency.

•Is it to develop the Big Society fetish? If it is, since it's apparently belt-tightening time, it would be silly wishful thinking. Very few are going to want to buy their way into volunteering!

•Is it that the government thinks fragmenting large woodlands into many small, probably fenced, contiguous areas is a good thing? Estate managers, walkers, riders and wildlife all know that's a really stupid idea.

•Or is it a standard political diversion strategy - urgent government activity to distract us from dwelling on harmful major cuts elsewhere?

Whatever the reasons, it's time we got some straight answers from our MP.

And finally, may I suggest that, as well as us all signing petitions, everyone writes individually to our MP objecting to the proposals? If we start to drown him in paper he might just get the idea that we're not happy about them!

– David Norman, Longhope.