Sunday, 5 April 2015

Perhaps we Should give 1.2 Million to Heritage Action Next Year

Heritage Action write (Sunday 5 April 2015) about the episode I mentioned when a Lauren Proctor, a PAS FLO went on record as dithering between non-committal about bad practice, or ignoring it (she chose 'ignore'):
Paul Barford has just posed a simple question about PAS that is relevant to the above: “Can they commit themselves to a firm policy of not only in a somewhat passive manner promoting best practice but actively condemning bad practice?” You might think that after 17 years and millions of words and pounds they had already done so. But no, there’s no trace – unless anyone can show otherwise. I think perhaps it’s time we wrote a succinct statement for them (as is our prerogative as prejudiced and ill-informed trolls), one which actively condemns bad practice and acknowledges for the information of taxpayers and landowners that the evidence indicates it is very widespread not rare, and publicly ask them to concur. So that’s what we’ll do in a few days.
It strikes me that Heritage Action for 1.2 million pounds is better value than a non-committal ivory tower Scheme's inaction. Why do we not take the money from PAS who cannot commit to criticising bad practice among metal detecting "partners" and give it to somebody who jolly well will?

No comments:

Creative Commons License
Ten utwór jest dostępny na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa-Bez utworów zależnych 3.0 Unported.