IT emerges that from legal opinion, it is unlikely, if not impossible, that public access to land can be guaranteed following a change of ownership. It follows that a crucial component in the woodlands sell-off is flawed, if not deceitful.

So how much more of the case being advanced by our worthy MP is similarly unsound? His main theme appears to be "trust me, I am a politician," hardly a convincing line?

He informs his electorate that he will only "speak to them" when the first stage in the legislative process has passed, ie. publication of the White Paper. At that point, the only way to defeat the Public Bodies Bill will be to organise a lobby of MPs to vote down the Act when it is offered for vote in the Commons.

So are we to believe that currently Mr Harper is busily soliciting support among his fellow members? But curiously we hear nothing of this at all.

He must be aware that his electorate are not in favour of the proposed measures regarding disposal of Forest woodlands.

So is he telling us he is quite comfortable to abandon his constitutional duty to represent the views of electors and become a quasi civil servant and merely do his masters' bidding? Is he perhaps in the wrong job?

– Darrell Lawrence, Lancaster Drive, Lydney.