[Diggers350] The death of Monkton Wyld? + Royal sibsidised offshore windfarm bonaza, Medieval power and private property

[Tony Gosling]

The Death of Monkton Wyld..?

<https://tlio.org.uk/the-death-of-monkton-wyld/>30 
December 2023 
<https://tlio.org.uk/author/tony/>Tony 
Gosling<https://tlio.org.uk/the-death-of-monkton-wyld/#respond>Leave 
a comment   https://tlio.org.uk/the-death-of-monkton-wyld/
The Death of Monkton Wyld?   30th December 2023 – by Linda Beamish

 It’s s if Four Headless Horsemen rode in on the 
back of Stephen Williams  in 2023 – and murdered 
the Charity and the Community that ran it!
When 4 new trustees; Laura Guest, Steven Slavin, 
Juliet Ann Lovelace-Johnson and Richard 
Lovelace-Johnson; took over their roles in 
January 2023, they effectively killed the charity 
they took over.- just as if it were a hostile 
corporate takeover.        Like poison, the 
Toxicity of The City spread through the green 
veins of the countryside all the way to the 
rolling hills of Dorset, blackening the 
capillaries of it’s host body as it did so, 
seemingly aiming to kill-off their own hosts, the 
experts in Sustainable Living that provided the 
educational and exemplary aims of the UK 
registered Charity. [continues below....]



Offshore windfarm anyone? King Charles has 
acquired our continental shelf, almost three times the UK’s land area


Subsidised offshore Windfarm Anyone? How The King 
Cashed In On Our Seabed – a tale of Medieval 
power and private property ownership
 as UK poverty spirals out of control

The royal family has made millions from the 
exploitation of the seabed­a resource that 
belongs to us all. Is it time for people and 
planet to be put ahead of 
profit? 
<https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/world/monarchy/62141/how-the-monarchy-cashes-in-on-our-seabed>Prospect 
Magazine – By Guy Standing Jul23
https://tlio.org.uk/offshore-windfarm-anyone-king-charles-has-acquired-our-continental-shelf-almost-three-times-the-uks-land-area/

Ever since ancient Rome, the sea, seabed and 
seashore have been accepted as part of the 
commons­res communes omnium­belonging to 
everybody equally, and inalienable as state or 
private property. The commons as a distinct form 
of property was taken forward in Magna Carta and 
the Charter of the Forest of 1217, the twin 
bedrocks of common law and all democracies.
A commons depends on the “sovereign”­in the UK’s 
case, the monarchy­acting as steward or trustee, 
with responsibility for preserving it for 
generations to come. For more than 650 years, 
following a ruling by King Edward I in 1299, the 
monarchy accepted this positive duty, known as the Public Trust Doctrine.
However, in the past 60 years, the monarchy has 
gradually plundered the blue commons­the seabed 
around the British Isles­transforming it into 
nothing less than a rentier capitalist empire. 
That empire, in the decade since 2013, is thought 
to have earned the royal family in the region of 
£193m. The new king, Charles III, who while heir 
to the throne established a reputation as an 
environment protector, has inherited and continues to profit from this system.
The evolution began in 1961, two years after the 
discovery in Dutch waters of large quantities of 
North Sea gas. The Crown Estate was constituted 
by an act of parliament to manage the assets 
belonging to the monarchy, with a mandate to 
maximise revenue and capital value for the 
Treasury. As King, Charles is not involved in 
managing these assets; they are not the monarch’s 
personal property but “the sovereign’s public 
estate”, managed by the Crown Estate supposedly 
in the public interest. {continues below....}





(continued....) The Death of Monkton Wyld..?

If the UK Charity Commission does not take any 
form of Legal action against the four new 
trustees, and the instigator, following 
complaint, it must be seen as duplicitous as a government body.

What’s happened at Monkton Wyld Court this year 
should not be allowed to happen anywhere else to 
anyone else, and the world needs to learn from 
this case now.  (Change your foundation documents 
so that Trustees do NOT Own The Land and Property.)

On the 11th October, quote: ‘Without any warning 
or consultation, Trustees change the Charity’s 
Articles of Association on the Company House 
website. They take the Articles of a London-based 
Community Interest Company called Public Voice 
CIC, make a few small changes, and paste it in to 
replace the previous Articles. Funnily enough, 
one of the Directors of Public Voice is Laura 
Guest who is also the main Trustee driving all 
the changes at Monkton Wyld Court.

Among other things, there are changes to the 
objects of the Charity, which for many years have 
been to promote education in sustainability and 
to maintain the listed buildings. Now the 
Charity’s objects include the promotion of 
“commerce, art, science, education, religion, 
charity or any profession, and to promote any 
social, political or sporting activity and 
anything incidental or conducive to the above 
objects”. Just about anything in fact. There are 
also changes making it easier to pay Trustees for 
their services and to sell off the charity to 
something other than another charity. A complaint 
to the Charity Commission has been made by former 
Trustees and community members.’ reference the 
Monkton Wyld Court Case website linked above, 
which transparently carries continuing updates.

It is vital, now, that ALL communities and 
Intentional Communities, EcoVillages, Coops and 
CoHousing Communities, everywhere, take note and 
learn from this case – fast.  (Please help to 
spread the word.)  Ensure that, where your 
community may have (new) trustees, they have a 
genuine understanding of, and empathy to, your 
charitable aims, and that – if they come from the 
corporate sector they have understanding, 
experience, and/or training in environmental 
sustainability, and aims of your community.

If you have set up as a Workers Cooperative, 
please (please) do insure that NO former members 
have any form of access to your online accounts, 
if they do, they could also achieve the aims of 
the former member of the workers coop that ran 
Monkton Wyld Court charity, that hacked into 
their accounts and changed details to cast shadow on their good work.

The corporate world should not be allowed to have 
anything to do with the control of the non-profit 
Third Sector – let alone sustainable and 
ecological communities like Monkton Wyld Court, 
particularly since it has been the unsustainable 
and unethical practices of the Corporate sector, 
that have created the need for the Third Sector 
guidelines for environmental sustainability and 
sustainable community living projects like this in the first place!

People need to feel safe in living in 
communities, not be under constant attack by 
people who haven’t even a thread of understanding 
of the aims of sustainable communities they’ve 
never left The City to take a look at – but taken 
the word of one man – against the democratic 
community vote.  (Living safely in communities is 
one of the planning guidelines.)

Lessons need to be learned – and not just in how 
to live sustainably – but most especially now for 
communities, since several other well established 
ecologically sustainable community living 
projects in the UK have also been subject to 
similar or corporate takeover recently.  (We are 
all vulnerable, especially rurally and in isolation.)

The non-profit Third Sector has a whole mountain 
of additional rules to adhere to, and targets to 
meet, that are completely alien and opposite to 
those of the the corporate (capitalistic) Private 
Sector, and even much of the Public Sector too 
now, since Councils boast of their new Corporate 
bodies on the colourful covers of their glossy journals.

It appears that we are at that point in time that 
has been prophesied for millennia, (as well as 
that of the millennium prophecy of 2002)
 But 
don’t worry, since: ‘The Meek Shall Inherit The Earth’ (Matthew 5:5).

In short, some of us knew what was coming
 Some 
of us didn’t, and some of us didn’t want to know, 
or thought that they had the solution in place 
already, and – like Monkton Wyld Court – were 
taken off-guard, and without defence or the opportunity to defend themselves.

If any intentional community member is reading 
this now, please ensure that it is possible for 
your community non-profit to scrutinise any 
trustee applicants credentials, and if applicants 
come directly from any other sector than the 
Third Sector, that they have fully studied the 
full quota of rules, laws and guidance for the 
governance of non-profits and coops stipulated by 
the United Nations, government departmental 
guidelines, and more.  If they haven’t, they 
should not become trustees of a charity – nor be directors of a non-profit.

According to the Law, nobody, in any sector, 
should ever take the word of one person, and/or 
take action against a community of at least 15 
witnesses – without first taking diligent notice 
of the statement of every other person witness 
to, involved or accused, or looking at the 
evidence – and most especially not when they have 
only just walked into the position as trustee of 
a UK registered charity, as in this case.

 From what I was able to ascertain speaking with 
friends at the Resistance Festival at Monkton 
Wyld Court and the Valley Vibes Festival in Devon 
held earlier this summer – including 
investigative journalist Tony Gosling and other 
members of www.tlio.org.uk – action needs to be 
taken to support the rights of Simon Fairlie, 
Gill Barron, Jasmine, Jon, Jarred, and all the 
other community members affected.

As is the case with communities and intentional 
communities, this is not just ‘a job’ it is a way 
of life – it is both home and environment – in 
other words, the community has lost 
everything.  The people have lost everything,

The pigs were gone by the time the Resistance 
Festival was held at the end of August, and since 
then, the micro-dairy, which was one of Britain’s 
oldest examples as taught at the Resistance 
Festival, the Programme for which is shown right.

Because the members of the intentional community 
followed the law – they were sacked – and made 
homeless.  And in fact, aged 72, sustainability 
and rural planning expert, author Simon Fairlie 
was himself put into virtual house arrest as the 
new rules of the new (ruling) trustees, governing 
his lack of access to any of the community spaces 
or amenities, since the entire 11 acres where the 
community lives, is, of course, both!

According to the latest news from Monkton Wyld, 
Simon’s virtual house arrest eventually spiralled 
into a police arrest, on a trumped up charge of 
car theft by trustees.  As shown in the 
photograph online, Simon, co-author of The Land 
magazine, was forced into the back of a police 
van – as if he were a criminal – and kept in 
custody for nine hours.  The trustees have also 
now forced Simon’s micro dairy to have no income 
whatsoever, as they have initiated action with 
the authorities prohibiting the sale of their 
wonderful range of organic raw dairy 
products.  (It was amazing to hear how much could 
be made from so few jersey cows at the 
festival.  And the taste, was truly 
scrumptious!)  What an unwarranted sad loss.

Co-Author of The Land magazine Jill Barron, aged 
73, was also sacked by the trustees and forced to 
move out of the community, as was Jasmine the 
Gardener, her partner Jon, Jarred and his 
partner, and more – and most of the community 
have resigned in protest, alongside the only remaining original trustee.

On top of all that, somebody, somewhere, has also 
hacked into the workers coop accounts – and 
altered them – changing evidence vital to their 
case.  (Another reminder for Intentional 
Communities: make sure that accounts CANNOT be 
hacked into by anyone not currently a member of 
their Workers Cooperative or Community.)

There is now nobody with the knowledge, 
educational research, or understanding, left, to 
run Monkton Wyld – and as such it really has been 
murdered.  (The question is, can it be rebuilt, 
like Stiffkey Bridge? Or perhaps to Rebuild Community @WhatsApp?)

Sustainable Community Living Projects are even 
more vital today than ever, so it really is 
crucial that communities ensure that this sort of 
takeover doesn’t happen again, for the futures of 
everyone concerned – and for Earth.

What’s happened in the Monkton Wyld Court Case 
linked above, should be criminal, and is:

On the Pearson BTEC HNC in Building Studies 
2001-2003, students were taught of the need for 
(truly) sustainable construction, and, as the 
government and Local Authorities had targets we 
all needed to aim to achieve as designers, 
exactly what that is in terms of construction and 
the environment, with aims to achieve the highest 
possible design and build targets of build code 
Level 6 (+).  *IE GREEN DESIGN by Avril Fox and 
Robin Murrell, 1989 © Longmans ISBN: 1 85454 200 1

Students were advised to further research CAT 
EcoVillage in Wales – Canolfan Y Dechnoleg Amgen – www.cat.org.uk

– And were also advised to look online for others 
as there were many exemplars to the same 
educational standards – one such being Monkton 
Wyld Court Centre for Sustainable Living, until now.

It’s seriously wrong isn’t it


So
 Why would anyone, ever, want to become a 
trustee of a charity such as Monkton Wyld Court? (School?)

Well, in this case, it might also later prove to 
be a case of The Land – and not just the now homeless magazine.

If trustees takeover the running of charities, 
wherein the trustees Own The Land under the terms 
of the Intentional Community documents, as 
recorded on the Intentional Community platform 
www.ic.org – there could easily be 
incentive.  (Beware!  Write Community Foundation 
Documents differently!  Protect The Community 
that lives on The Land! Protect the Village! 
Protect the EcoVillage! Save The Parish! Save The Children & Vulnerable too.)

The Four trustees took on their roles in January 
2023, and apparently took the complaint of a 
disgruntled rejected applicant to the intentional 
community as a Code Red, and sacked the backbone 
of the community in flagrant disregard for the 
rule of law that actually governs sustainable 
community living projects.  (As students were 
taught at HNC level in Building Law, quote: 
‘Ignorance Is No Defence In A Court Of Law’ – that cuts both ways.)

In other words, ensure that you do you your own research.  Historically:

Going back to the HNC course in Building Studies, 
students were taught building history, and why it 
really is crucial now, to design for social 
exclusion – and without any more waste, to design 
for low impact and zero impact construction – and 
to consider ecological and regenerative designs 
for the landscape too, I.e. Permaculture.

Following on from The Egan Report, the 
construction sector also needed to change to 
become Ethical – as so much of the sector wasn’t 
– and again, this followed UK government 
guidelines that included Partnering (experts) 
rather than Tendering for projects.  (Architects 
and designers need to know this, as they often 
guide the design team, which now also includes 
their clients, whom they have a legal requirement to advise.)

Does any of this ever get taught to financiers, 
bankers, or anyone working in the corporate 
sector?  (I don’t know because I’m not from there 
myself thank God – but it should, especially in terms of Building Law.)

The fact that we all need to design and build 
differently now – SHOULD be taught to everyone – 
not just students on HNC courses following their 
own Continued Professional Development.

We can’t carry on designing and building 
unsustainably as it goes against all the government EU and UN guidelines.

This is because 70% of our planet is covered with 
water, and of the 30% of land above sea level, 
one third is now desert or suffering from 
drought, and is degenerating at an alarming rate 
– while the human population increases, landmass 
decreases – and as arctic and antarctic ice 
continues to melt, (also at an alarming rate), 
designers needed to design differently.  It is 
also criminal to cause any more land, water or 
air pollution or contamination, or take away 
natural habitat vital to the support of endangered species.

(We couldn’t carry on living or building 
unsustainably. UK Planning Guidelines were 
changed to keep the UK in line with UN guidelines.)

We couldn’t carry on and on, fighting for The 
Land to build upon, mine or excavate – and in 
2002, when the lecturer delivered THE most 
damning and accurate prophecy – there was a 
terrible frenzy for every single piece of land 
that came up on the market, with everyone bidding 
hoping to make vast profits from property 
investment.  Some people even gave up their day 
jobs, and built up property portfolios instead, 
never bothering to study Building Studies first.

Property and land values were positively booming 
– and that was a second problem – because it was 
completely unsustainable as proven 
historically.  From Boom to Bang to Bust – 
repeatedly – repeatedly leaving millions in dire 
poverty, homeless, bankrupt, bereft of food and water, and shelter.

Historically, it has always been the same really, 
hasn’t it?  And that is exactly why all the rules 
were changed after WWII, giving people their 
human rights back, and ensuring their protection under International Law.

Since The Roman Invasion 2000 years ago, it’s 
been a case of Divide, Rule, Conquer – and make money in the process.

And that’s exactly where the Third Sector 
differs, because it really is dead opposite.

IF the UK Charity Commission fails to take action 
AGAINST the four new trustees at Monkton Wyld 
Court, listed on the UK government Charity 
Commission pages as being: Laura Guest, Steven 
Slavin, Juliet Ann Lovelace Johnson and Richard 
Lovelace Johnson, then perhaps as Friends we 
should take further action in support of MWC.

Perhaps we should call in the (new) Ketts 
brothers to protect rural, and urban, communities 
rights, or a renewed Boudicca force to be 
reckoned with, or co-create and drum up a new Peasants Revolt.

The Land Is Ours, www.tlio.org.uk – is possibly 
the best place to click to start and join the 
Peasants Revolt – it’s possibly one of The Best 
platforms now to get your voice heard – especially as a rural Peasant!

Common Land (peasants have registered rights to 
in gross) has been reregistered by the CRA in the 
UK, after application by Corporate Bodies, and 
Private Estates, (and some major and minor 
charities), for their profits, at the loss of 
Common Rights Holders Rights and due consultation with CRH.

Historically, Rights have been removed from local 
rural people and parishes, which were finally 
returned and guaranteed protection by ALL the Nations united in forming the UN.

Once upon a time, we were ALL rural, lived in the 
countryside, and understood the importance of 
stewarding The Land wisely, for the benefit of 
our families and communities, for future 
generations.  We once understood, and were wise, 
to the ways of the countryside – or, we died.

We knew we were completely at the hands of God 
and nature, and were dependent on the natural 
environment – and were as flexible as we needed to be to survive.

The Romans started to change all of that, 
changing the landscape, bringing in non-native 
species, and separating the communities that 
carried the knowledge of the natural environment, 
and introducing and enforcing their own rules.

People were no longer free, and were expected to 
pay taxes for the food they grew, and that was just the start of it.

Over the years, The Land has repeatedly been 
removed from the people indigenous to it, who 
were either forced to work as slaves, were tortured or killed.

The Domesday Book of 1086 originally cast in 
stone WHO owned The Land at the behest of William 
the Conqueror – King William 1 – listing the 
Lords of The Land, as decreed then, and what their dues were to the King.

Over the centuries, the amount of land available 
to The People has been taken away from them, and, 
in the end, the Industrial Revolution was the start of the end.

The Land Inclosure Acts then went on to create 
legal property rights to land previously held in 
common in England and Wales according to 
Wikipedia, which goes on to explain that between 
1604 and 1914, over 5,200 individual acts 
enclosing public land were passed, effecting 28,000sq kilometres.

The vast majority of the public land still 
available at the time, was categorized as either 
common or waste land, which rural peasants being 
landless themselves, were able to farm or 
forage.  This then led homeless or landless 
peasants to go to work in the factories in the 
towns and cities, since they had no other options, or very few.

Apparently, quote: “The powers granted in the 
Inclosure Act 1773 of the Parliament of Great 
Britain were often abused by landowners: the 
preliminary meetings where enclosure was 
discussed, intended to be held in public, often 
took place in the presence of only the local 
landowners, who regularly chose their own 
solicitors, surveyors and commissioners to decide 
on each case.  In 1786 there were still 250,000 
independent landowners, but in the course of only 
thirty years their number was reduced to 32,000.  (Reference Wikipedia.)

Obviously, as shown by the four trustees, despite 
or in spite of all the new laws and governance, this is STILL going on today.

It IS historically the case, that the corporate 
and capitalist, needs slaves working for nothing 
in order to maximise profits – and even more 
people to count it all, and protect or defend it from thieves.

But it is also very wrong to expect people 
working in communities or in the non-profit 
sector, to have the same wage or working 
conditions as those in the corporate, Public or 
Private sectors.  Or even to have the same expectations.

Most people forming the Intentional Community at 
Monkton Wyld Court, lived there FREE – or at 
least, had FREE Free-range organic dairy produce, 
organic fruit and vegetables, and FREE facilities.  (Instead of High Wages.)

Some things in life are worth far (far) more than money


Since the end of WWII, a raft of Human Rights 
have been written to protect humanity – and to 
protect Earth’s natural and organic 
environment.  The Third Sector specialises in 
giving all to these aims – where the Corporate, 
the Private and the Public Sectors do not.  The 
1950s and 1960s led to an environmental 
awakening, and the call for World Peace – ‘Make 
Love Not War’ was the order of the day.

Veteran environmentalists and authors such as 
Avril Fox, George Monbiot, Simon Fairlie, Tony 
Gosling, Dame Jennifer Lonsdale, Dr Christopher 
Busby and David Attenborough, have been 
researching, educating or spearheading protests 
and campaigning for change for decades.  In some 
instances their knowledge spearheaded UN guidelines for change.

Right now, we either need to start to build 
environmentally and economically sustainable 
community living projects across the entire UK, 
(and Arks in risk zones), following the exemplars 
of EcoVillages and other eco-communities that 
have already blazed the trail and pioneered ways 
in which to hit ALL the Planning Guidelines, both 
in terms of Nationally and Internationally – or 
we will end up in the fullness of the 1984 projection.

Right now, today, there are two paths we can go 
by (quote: from The Long Road to Realism, 
autobiography of Avril Fox), one is inherently 
good and follows those guidelines, the other is 
disastrously bad – and will end in the end of 
humanity, and the end of an environmentally sustainable planet.

It was only on the award winning and green 
exemplars of EcoVillages such as CAT, Lammas, 
Findhorn, Fife Earthship, and the Hockerton 
Housing Project, CoHousing Communities and 
Eco-Communities such as Monkton Wyld that set the 
standards for others to follow that the UK 
government set aside as many millions as it did 
for Community Land Trusts (CLTs), and gave us the 
Right to Bid and the Right to Build.  If the 
exemplars that we are supposed to learn from are 
taken away from us, as is proving to be the case 
for Monkton Wyld and other established eco communities, then God help us – all.

If we have ‘Proven Need’, are suffering from 
exclusion, poverty, and have the evidence to 
prove our case, then we have the Right to Build 
as either individuals or intentional communities 
in application, according to the UK government’s 
Communities website and PDFs, and Exemption and 
Exception sites were to be allocated by Councils, 
then where should we be allowed to learn what is 
required?  (Should everyone just keep on and on reinventing the wheel?)

Given the fact that humans now ALL have a Right 
to Life protected by Law, a Right to Water, a 
Right to Life – a Right to Live as one in Nature.

The Workers Cooperative formed by the Intentional 
Community had an Agreed Low Wage.  Ergo, it was 
very wrong for the new trustees to use the 
clamant’s claim of a Low Wage against the 
Community that democratically chose or voted 
between them to refuse The Claimant’s Application to join Their Community.

FREE showers – free water and toilet facilities – 
free organic food, and a healthy, safe and happy 
environment in the beautiful Dorset hills, WHO 
wouldn’t want to work there, learn there, and 
become a part of this amazing coop community.  (I 
know I would – if it weren’t for my dependents, 
and other commitments within the non-profit 
sector I volunteer.  N.B.  Note to the UK Charity 
Commission – IF action is taken against the four 
new trustees, and you need to fill vacancies for 
trustees of the Monkton Wyld Court Charity – I, for one, volunteer.)

In fact, when I heard what had happened at 
Monkton Wyld Court, I first travelled down to 
Devon this summer to attend the Valley Vibes 
Festival, to meet with investigative journalist 
Tony Gosling and other www.tlio.og.uk members and 
supporters to discuss the case, and then later 
travelled back down to the West, to The 
Resistance Festival held at Monkton Wyld Court in 
Dorset to find out if there was anything that I 
could do to help, and again, to network with 
other supporters and members of The Land Is Ours.

Although it wasn’t the same as the T.L.I.O. 
Gathering of 2011 – I still managed to learn an 
awful lot, (and not solely about the Monkton Wyld 
Court Case), as I attended as many of the classes 
as I could!  In short, I learned an awful lot 
this summer – including what I might be able to 
do to help – for example, writing this now!

George Monbiot originally formed 
T.L.I.O.  However, now seems to consider that The 
Land should be allowed to regenerate – without 
people either stewarding it or looking after it 
while living upon it as we have traditionally – 
and then considers himself to be the only person 
on the entire planet concerned about how to feed 
the world simultaneous to regenerating the 
natural environment – while preaching the Land Reform Act.

Living in a city – or even The City – looking out 
at the reducing countryside, is completely 
different to living in the countryside looking at 
the damages caused  to the countryside by those 
of The City, the cities and the towns, (as a 
peasant)
”  – Speaking as a Revolting Peasant – 
because the government made me so.


Written by Linda Beamish; Group 
Moderator/Regional Organiser EcoVillage Network 
UK; Admin. Pentref Eco Cymru EcoVillage Wales; 
Ambassador Imagine Rural Development Initiative 
(IRDI) Ecovillage Zambia; Community Organiser 
www.off-grid.net // www.LandBuddy.com – freelance 
(self-employed) Eco-architectural designer 
www.eco-designs.co.uk and social entrepreneur – 
AnArkAngel representing Avril Fox, the Patron 
Saint of the Ark Angels non-profit organisation.








(.....continued) Offshore windfarm anyone? King 
Charles has acquired our continental shelf, 
almost three times the UK’s land area

At the time, the Crown had no ownership rights in 
the sea beyond the lower-tide mark on the 
seashore. Indeed, in 1951 the Labour foreign 
secretary, Herbert Morrison, had declared that 
the sea around Britain was not the property of the state or anybody.

But in 1962, as was revealed much later, the 
Queen privately told the first commissioner of 
the Estate­the leader of the board running the 
corporation’s commercial interests­that she had 
seen something about “taking over rights on land 
under the sea”. In fact, the Estate’s legal 
adviser in 1959 had proposed enshrining in law 
the extension of Crown lands to the whole of the 
continental shelf. Other Estate officials advised 
against trying to extend rights to the seabed, 
because this would draw attention to the fact 
that no existing legislation gave such ownership.

However, prompted by the passing of a UN 
convention that granted states rights to the 
continental shelves by their shores, and by 
drilling companies seeking legal clarity on 
ownership of the seabed in expectation of finding 
commercial oil and gas reserves, the outgoing 
Conservative government of Alec Douglas-Home 
passed the Continental Shelf Act in 1964. It gave 
the Crown Estate precisely the rights it had 
earlier refrained from seeking. This granting of 
ownership to the Crown Estate was a huge 
enclosure of the commons but did not change the 
fact that the seabed was still part of the 
commons. The Crown, and the government as its 
agent, became the seabed’s steward, responsible for preserving it.

All at sea: the Crown Estate (and in Scotland, 
the separate Crown Estate Scotland) owns the 
seabed to 12 nautical miles out. It also holds 
rights to explore and use natural resources 
(except oil, coal and gas) and generate renewable 
power on the UK’s continental shelf

As a business, the Crown Estate grew at a modest 
rate during the following decades, returning all 
revenue to the Treasury while the monarch 
received a fixed sum­the annual “civil list”­to 
pay for royal expenses. The Estate’s marine 
activities did not include the North Sea oil and 
gas bonanza, for although the Crown owns the oil 
and gas found beneath the sea, as beneath the 
land, their exploitation is managed by the government and its agencies.
In the 1980s, the Thatcher government sold leases 
on lots in the North Sea to oil companies at 
ridiculously low prices, taking the revenue as a 
windfall profit to pay for tax cuts. This was a 
blatant depletion of the commons, in sharp 
contrast to Norway’s decision to use its surplus 
oil and gas revenues to create what is now a 
mammoth sovereign wealth fund, ensuring benefits 
flow to both current and future generations.

The next phase came in 2001, when offshore wind 
energy took off. In a first step, the Crown 
Estate leased 12 seabed sites of 10 square km 
each. Three additional rounds saw leases awarded 
in 2003, 2010 and finally in 2021, when the Crown 
Estate auctioned six large lots, most of which 
went to German and French firms. The most recent 
round included the novel addition that the 
companies would pay the Crown a ground rent, an 
annual “option fee”, even before producing any 
wind energy. It was estimated that this round 
alone could generate nearly £9bn over 10 years.

And here is the rub. Over the past two decades, 
successive governments have allowed the Crown 
Estate to become a monopolistic corporate 
enterprise. In 2004, the New Labour government 
passed the Energy Act, which enabled the Estate 
to claim a share of the revenue from production 
of all offshore wind and wave electricity. In 
2008, it extended this to gas and carbon dioxide storage.

These measures intensified a clear conflict of 
interest for the Crown Estate between being a 
steward responsible for preserving the commons 
for future generations and a business working to 
maximise revenue and profits. Meanwhile, to add 
to its profits, the Estate had started to invest in joint ventures.
In 2010, the Parliamentary Treasury Committee 
concluded that the Crown Estate was focusing too 
much on income from its control of the seabed and 
seashore, rather than on the long-term public 
interest. In what was hardly an adequate 
rebuttal, the Estate’s CEO said he was pleased 
the committee recognised they were running a 
successful business operation, adding only that 
the Estate took its responsibility to act in the 
wider public interest “very seriously”.

Nothing was done to prioritise once again the 
role of the Crown as protector and steward. The 
situation was tilted further in favour of 
commercial criteria in 2012, when George Osborne, 
at the time chancellor of the exchequer, 
abolished the civil list in favour of a 
“sovereign grant”, calculated as 15 per cent of 
the Crown Estate’s profit. That figure was 
increased to 25 per cent in 2017, ostensibly to 
cover the estimated cost of refurbishing 
Buckingham Palace; at present it is set to revert 
to 15 per cent in 2028. The creation of a 
deadline in itself created a new moral hazard, 
giving the Crown Estate an incentive to maximise short-term profits.

In brief, the Crown Estate has become a 
monopolistic sealord. It has monopolised offshore 
wind and wave energy and created an oligopoly 
consisting of a few, overwhelmingly foreign-owned 
multinationals, a structure that promises to keep 
prices and revenues above what would arise in a 
competitive market. Although the Estate uses an 
auction process to decide which firms secure the 
leases, it still decides how many leases to sell, 
as well as the size and location of the lots.

In the decade since 2013, the Crown Estate has 
made more than £1bn profit from its marine 
business (known in the Estate’s accounts as 
energy, minerals and infrastructure until 
2019/20, and inclusive of aquaculture until 
2016/17). Over the years, this sum has been 
delivered to the Treasury, and has contributed to 
the pot from which the sovereign grant is 
calculated. Precise figures are difficult to 
discern due to the opaque nature of Crown Estate 
accounts, but Prospect research suggests that in 
the ten years to 2022/23, the seabed has earned the royals approximately £193m.


£193m: the royal family’s estimated earnings from the sea, 2013 to 2023

This sum takes into account King Charles’ 
magnanimous announcement in January 2023 that the 
Crown Estate would hand over to the government 
what a spokesperson called the “offshore energy 
windfall” from the 2021 round of sales, which 
boosted the marine sector’s profits from £127.5m 
to £370.8m in a year. In any case, revenue from 
the commons should not be treated as a “windfall” 
at all. It should never have been the Crown’s to begin with.
In its eagerness to make profits, the Crown 
Estate has even sold development rights for one 
patch of seabed to two different projects at the 
same time, one for a giant Danish-owned offshore 
windfarm, the other for storing carbon dioxide 
under the seabed. An industry insider commented 
tersely that the Crown Estate was being “a bit greedy”.

By the financial year ending in 2023, the value 
of the Crown Estate’s marine businesses was 
£5.7bn, up by 14 per cent on the year before, 
mainly because of offshore wind. The Crown is not 
liable to pay tax on the sovereign grant. 
Overall, the Estate’s portfolio is worth almost 
£16bn. It is a major industrial enterprise, but 
one that does not have to adhere to free market 
principles, let alone be answerable to the commoners.

The Welsh should feel particularly aggrieved, in 
that whereas all management and revenue of the 
Crown Estate in Scotland is in the hands of the 
Scottish government, revenue generated in Wales 
is not devolved. Extraordinarily, the value of 
the Crown Estate’s marine portfolio in Wales rose 
from £49m in 2020 to £549m in 2021 and to £603m 
in 2022. None of it went to the Welsh government, 
let alone to Welsh commoners. No wonder a 
majority of Welsh people want the Estate to be devolved as it is in Scotland.
25 per cent: proportion of the Crown Estate’s 
profit given to the royal family through the sovereign grant

These inequities are compounded by the fact that 
the Crown Estate has not always, before granting 
leases, carried out environmental impact 
assessments in accordance with either 
international law or the precautionary principle, 
which requires decision-makers to err on the side 
of caution when considering projects that might 
entail serious or unknown ecological risks. For 
the first three rounds of sale of seabed rights, 
the Estate was required under EU law to 
demonstrate that it had considered alternative 
sites before deciding where to locate 
infrastructure developments such as windfarms.

There is no evidence that it did this. Instead, 
assessments of the environmental impacts were 
left to developers, with the UK government 
judging in which sprawling zones development 
could occur. And the Estate itself has admitted 
that in the three earlier leasing rounds it 
didn’t have data with which to make objective assessments.

There has been progress: the Crown Estate and the 
government will in future examine the 
environmental impact of offshore windfarms, and 
outside of leasing rounds, work is under way to 
better understand the impact on nature of marine 
infrastructure. Had the Crown acted as the 
steward of the commons, this work would have been started much earlier.

In one case, the Danish power company Ørsted 
received approval for a project off the North 
Yorkshire coast which will affect a Special 
Protection Area that is home to Britain’s biggest 
colony of seabirds. The Estate and the government 
accepted that the project would threaten 
endangered birds, but let it go ahead on the 
basis of a promise by the company to introduce an 
offset breeding scheme to make up for bird 
deaths. There is no evidence that the scheme will work.

But while wind energy­sorely needed for the green 
transition­has received public scrutiny for its 
impact from nature, it is far from being the 
Crown Estate’s only source of profit from the sea.

Sand and gravel are easily the most mined 
minerals in the world, with about 50bn tonnes 
excavated from rivers, lakes and the sea 
annually. This figure is growing by around 5 per 
cent each year, feeding demands, led by China, 
for concrete and other construction materials. 
There is an impending global shortage, and 
excessive excavation is already causing land erosion worldwide.

The Crown Estate is the only body in the UK with 
the designated or presumed authority to oversee 
the production and sale of our sea sand. It has 
been quietly expanding mining, to the point where 
21m tonnes of sand were excavated in 2022. A 
quarter was exported, mainly to Belgium and the Netherlands.

The manager of the Crown Estate’s “marine 
minerals portfolio” said in September 2022 that 
the Estate works “in partnership with industry, 
to help support the sustainable use of sand and 
gravel resources”. If it were a proper steward of 
the commons, the Estate would also work with 
conservation bodies, not just those interested in 
maximising extraction and profits. To protect 
against erosion and to avoid destruction of 
underwater ecosystems, there should be regular 
impact assessments of sand excavation before any 
more mining begins, done by independent bodies 
not answerable to the Crown Estate.

Bearing in mind that sea sand is an exhaustible 
common resource that will become more expensive 
as it becomes scarcer, a responsible steward 
would invest all or part of the revenues to 
maintain the capital value for the benefit of 
future generations, according to what is known as 
the Hartwick Rule of Intergenerational Equity. 
Instead, the Crown Estate is effectively treating 
all revenue from the sale of sea sand (as well as 
potash and other minerals found in the sea) as 
“windfall profit” for current spending.

Another seemingly innocuous activity being 
encouraged by the Estate is seaweed farming. 
Seaweed and seagrass are valuable for the marine 
ecosystem, not least as habitats and carbon sinks 
(they are far more effective than woodland in 
absorbing CO2 from the atmosphere). Nearly 90 per 
cent of seagrass has vanished from UK 
coastlines­much as a result of pollution, 
dredging and trawling­since the Estate took over 
the seabed as its income-earning property. 
Meanwhile, scientists predict that most of the 
UK’s 26,000 square miles of kelp forests will be lost by 2100.


£9bn: predicted windfall, over ten years, from 2023 offshore wind leases

Sadly, the Crown Estate has impeded some plans by 
civil society groups to replant thousands of 
acres of seagrass by charging, in at least one 
case, £500 an acre for doing so. One kelp farm 
company abandoned plans to develop a network of 
58 farms around the seabed due to lengthy 
bureaucratic delays by the Crown Estate. These 
are not the actions of a benign steward of the commons.
Then there are around 750 aquaculture sites­for 
farming fish (mostly salmon), shellfish and 
crustaceans­from which the Crown Estate Scotland 
(CES), an independent body that gives its entire 
revenue to the Scottish government, earns a hefty 
sum. The CES, which takes 1.5 per cent of 
turnover income, must be partially answerable for 
fish farming’s shocking record in Britain: farmed 
salmon have a premature mortality rate as high as 
24 per cent from disease and lice infestations; 
mass escapes threaten wild fish species; and the 
corporations, most foreign-owned, pay only half 
the true costs of production, with the remainder, 
including environmental costs, borne by local communities.

Scottish fisheries complain that licensed fish 
farms discharge sea lice and pesticides into the 
sea, killing wild fish. The CES, although more 
accountable to Scottish ministers, ignores the 
precautionary principle, and allows seabed 
dredging for scallops and bottom trawling for 
prawns, both of which do massive harm to marine ecosystems.

If the CES behaved as a real steward of the 
commons, it would demand that salmon farmers met 
higher ecological standards. If it cannot fulfil 
its positive duty to protect the commons then it should not be steward at all.

So what should be the political agenda? In the 
long run, a progressive government should want to 
restore the sea and seabed as part of Britain’s 
commons. In the immediate term, it should reform 
the governance of the Crown Estate, insisting 
that its primary responsibility is to preserve 
and enhance the capital value of the common 
resources in the sea around Britain.

The Crown Estate could charge firms more rent for 
ecologically damaging fish and shellfish farms. 
By contrast, it should not be charging anything 
for activities such as seaweed farming or 
seagrass replanting that revive marine 
ecosystems. It should make a commitment 
consistent with the High Seas Treaty, agreed at 
the UN marine biodiversity conference last year, 
to rewild 30 per cent of the seabed under its 
stewardship by 2030. It should stop the export of 
our sea sand. Above all, the next government 
should appoint a cabinet-level minister of the 
sea, whose responsibilities should include 
overseeing all the marine-related activities of the Crown Estate.

Finally, there is a transformational opportunity 
for a new progressive government. The King has 
said the £1bn a year “windfall” from the latest 
auction of our seabed should go to the public. 
The only equitable way to treat revenue from the 
commons would be to recycle it equally to all 
commoners­that is, to all of us. That £1bn a year 
should go into a Commons Capital Fund from which 
common dividends could be paid to every citizen. 
After all, the Crown’s role was to protect, not 
to plunder the commons. Charles III inherited an 
empire at sea­but he has the chance now to change it for the better.


Guy Standing is a Professorial Research Associate 
at SOAS University of London and a founding 
member and honorary co-president of the Basic 
Income Earth Network (BIEN), a non-governmental 
organisation that promotes a basic income for 
all. He is author of The Blue Commons: Rescuing the Economy of the Sea.






Weekly politics show page http://www.thisweek.org.uk
Radio stream live 5pm Fridays and repeated 
11am/pm UK time http://www.talkradio.org.uk
Also on: NOT The BCfm Politics Show App 
https://apkpure.com/not-the-bcfm-politics-show/com.sweetsmile.bottom_navigation_flutter 


NB please reply with any unsubscribe request in 
the email body, leaving the subject line intact, 
if you do not wish to recieve further emails - thanks
And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, 
he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and 
gave to them. 
<http://biblehub.com/luke/24-31.htm>31 And their 
eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he 
vanished out of their sight.  http://biblehub.com/kjv/luke/24.htm
'Capitalism is institutionalised bribery' TG - 
Cancelled -> https://www.youtube.com/user/PublicEnquiry/videos


Albert Pike’s 1871 
<https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/650822/Letter-WW3-200-year-old-islam-final-battle>WWIII 
plan to cancel God – 
<https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/may/11/accelerationism-how-a-fringe-philosophy-predicted-the-future-we-live-in>Accelerationist 
multicrisis: my schoolfriend 
<https://www.philosophyforlife.org/blog/accelerationism-amphetamine-philosophy-and-the-death-trip>‘Nazi 
Nick’s Dark Enlightenment ‘death trip’ is 
designed to 
<https://qz.com/1007144/the-neo-fascist-philosophy-that-underpins-both-the-alt-right-and-silicon-valley-technophiles>discredit 
all democracy
Essentials: 
<https://www.bitchute.com/video/AH8pJ8vLnpQQ/>Michael 
Hudson | 
<https://www.bitchute.com/video/mlGKutbgByo4/>Blackrock/Vanguard 
| Tony 
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAq1q1_swyM>on 
Brexit & 
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsxxlpLccE8&pp=ygUWVGhlIFRyYWl0b3JzIG9mIEFybmhlbQ%3D%3D>The 
Traitors of Arnhem | 
<https://www.bitchute.com/video/s3keNigJaj63/>Evolution 
| 
<https://www.bitchute.com/video/Yhv9ZMby68Ig>War 
between God & Lucifer | 
<http://www.itsuandi.org/itsui/downloads/Itsui_Materials/Albert_Pike's_Plan_for_Three_World_Wars.pdf>Plan 
for three World Wars | Armageddonists I have 
known: 
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXKz4uwZC_k>Nick 
Land (1975-8) | 
<https://www.bitchute.com/video/pkIIeuailaUt/>George 
Monbiot (1995-8) | Manna for the Revelation 
Generation: 
<https://www.radio4all.net/program/108328>CONSPIRACY 
CLASSICS, longer interviews/lectures

"And I think, in the end, that is the best 
definition of journalism I have heard; to 
challenge authority - all authority - especially 
so when governments and politicians take us to 
war, when they have decided that they will kill 
and others will die. " --Robert Fisk
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMn9GM4atN3t7AHJBbHMR0Q/videos
http://www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://www.thisweek.org.uk
http://www.911forum.org.uk
http://www.tlio.org.uk
Tony's free watermarked books www.bilderberg.org 
- My ebooks https://payhip.com/TonyGosling
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvPbHiqhLtpNWA_cg_1NULw
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMn9GM4atN3t7AHJBbHMR0Q
https://www.twitter.com/TonyGosling
https://www.facebook.com/tony.gosling.16
You can donate to support Tony's work here http://www.bilderberg.org/bcfm.htm
Or buy Tony's three ebooks for £10-£15 here 
https://payhip.com/TonyGosling or paperback here 
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/254963338161
TG mobile +44 7786 952037

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.gn.apc.org/pipermail/diggers350/attachments/20231230/4b1117aa/attachment-0001.html>