Ian Bradwell writes ......... Christmas Trees and the Carbon Footprint

The Liberal Democrats have pledged to plant 60 million trees but it does seem odd that, once a year, we cut down an x amount of trees and, for what? A couple of weeks, where they are put into a house, decorated, regularly fall apart and afterwards put on a rubbish tip. What sense does that make?

Now before I go on, I want to make something absolutely clear, the art of politics is compromise, so I am not saying, all naturally felled trees should not go into houses, we should have them in public places, for example in the City Centre near the Clock Tower and other places where people can see them nicely decorated. That is fine.

However, with the current debate of climate change, talk about the carbon footprint then decide of some celebration we want to do, which I agree with and should be called Christmas, not Xmas or Winter festival or awful silly names which people come out with, why should we put these trees into our homes? We should be looking for a viable alternative. Christmas Trees can be of an alternate material as we are an inventive species. If we do stop selling natural trees, it won't mean people losing jobs, as the trees will still need to be cultivated. People will be still needed to fell the trees for public spaces, for transportation, for decoration, people will be needed to plant more trees, the important thing is if you have 100 trees in a field and wish to remove 10, the remaining 90 still have fresh air filling our skies as the carbon dioxide goes into the tree prior to producing oxygen.

Trees are the lungs of the earth. We need more trees. We need to cut down less.

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Promoted and Published by Alan Fox on behalf of Ian Bradwell (Liberal Democrats) all at 59 St Albans Road, Leicester. LE2 1GF