Government can’t see the wood for the trees!

Since highlighting on Tuesday the Government’s plan to sell off large amounts of England’s public forest, it appears that there is to be a complete u-turn.

After heavy criticism from campaigners it seems that the proposals will be dropped, with the consultation swiftly wound up and the policy rethought.

At Prime Minister’s Questions in the Commons, Labour leader Ed Miliband asked Mr Cameron: “Can you tell us whether you are happy with your flagship policy on forestry?” Mr Cameron replied: “The short answer to that is no.”

A new panel of experts is now set to look at public access and biodiversity within the publicly owned woodland, and plans to offload public forest to private companies and individuals has also been dropped.

The u-turn will be welcomed by the many users of England’s public forest including the 520,000+ people who signed the online petition against the move.


Sean Logan, Solicitor, Hart Brown

Government scrapping default retirement age

Scrapping the default retirement age only means that employees will not automatically be expected to retire at a fixed age. There is no reason for experienced capable staff to retire just because they are 65. But will employers look to put clauses into contracts of employment stipulating a fixed age of retirement based on the nature of their business? If employers want a fixed age they can still insert this into their contracts of employment. (The employer will still need to be able to objectively justify a fixed contractual age for retirement, and this may largely depend on the nature of the business). Otherwise, if there are concerns about any employee’s capability, regardless of age, then capability procedures can be followed in the normal way. Vacancies arise when staff leave employment, or the company expands. In a buoyant market staff move on to increase experience, more varied roles or for greater salaries. Is retirement a major reason for staff vacancies? It is thought not. There is an argument to support the proposition that older workers are more reliable and more loyal, and less likely to leave their existing employer to enhance career progression. But will employers embrace or exploit this law?

Employers should continue to ensure they follow fair procedures both at the recruitment stage and at termination. They may otherwise face proceedings for age discrimination. What do you think?

Find out more about Hart Brown's employment department
Find out more about the author of this article, Liz Whitehead
Read the BBC article