The government has announced it is abandoning its controversial plans to sell 85% of England’s public forests.

Addressing MPs at 1pm today, environment secretary Caroline Spelman said the government had “got this one wrong”, adding that she took full responsibility for the situation.

At yesterday’s prime minister’s questions, David Cameron said he was unhappy about the proposed sell-off, sending a strong signal that the plans were about to be axed.

It is understood that a panel of experts will now be set up to examine public access and biodiversity issues within publicly-owned woodland.

The sell-off plan, which was to include the sale of commercial timber forests on 150-year leases, attracted a strong adverse reaction from the public, as well as criticism from the forest products sector, notably from the UK Forest Products Association, which said there was not a compelling case for breaking up the forests.

“I’m sorry,” said Ms Spelman. “We got this one wrong, but we have listened to people’s concerns.”

The government has already temporarily suspended a separate sale of the other 15% of forests, which would raise an estimated £100m, but this is expected to go ahead once extra safeguards on public access and biodiversity have been added.

The sale of all Forestry Commission-run land in England would raise an estimated £1bn for the public purse.

Speaking shortly after the announcement, Timber Trade Federation chief executive John White said the turnaround was “the right decision as it now allows a calm and reflective consideration of the real issues, namely the balance of access, biodiversity, together with quality and sustainable supply of the nation’s timber resource.”

David Sulman, executive director of the UK Forest Products Association, said he was “mightily relieved” at the news.

“We are very pleased and relieved that the government has dropped its ill-conceived and fundamentally flawed proposal which, if implemented, would have caused irreparable damage to businesses across the sector. The news will restore confidence across the sector and safeguard hundreds, if not thousands of jobs, mainly in the rural economy. We recognise that there was great public concern about access issues, but clearly, there was much more at stake than this; people’s livelihoods were at stake.”

“The run-up to the launch of the consultation and the period since has one of frenetic activity for UKFPA and its members, as we have all worked hard to raise awareness of industry’s concerns about the ludicrous proposals. It is good to see that this effort has resulted in the desired outcome.”

However, he cautioned, despite the euphoria surrounding the U-turn, the question of the requirement for the Forestry Commission to sell-off 15% (40,000ha) of the public forest estate in England over the next four years remains.

“Although these disposal plans, which were announced following last year’s Comprehensive Spending Review, were put on hold last week, we remain concerned that this is unfinished business and we are now seeking clarification on this programme,” said Mr Sulman. “Ideally, this programme should also be consigned to history. We need greater focus on commercial forestry in Great Britain as a whole, with renewed emphasis on commercial crops and increased planting.”

ConFor also welcomed the news and the government’s proposal to establish a panel to advise on the future direction of forestry and woodland policy in England.

“I met the minister Jim Paice, prior to the announcement, and explained that the leasing proposal was unlikely to work and that it did not address the concerns ConFor had previously raised,” said ConFor chief executive Stuart Goodall.

“We had real concern that public forests could be purchased by large electricity companies who would starve existing businesses of wood, threatening thousands of rural jobs, and that money raised would not be reinvested in English forestry.

“I also explained that the industry was concerned that it had been negatively portrayed in the mainstream media with scare stories about logging companies wanting to buy and cut down all the forests. The minister kindly apologised if that had been the case and explained that it had not been his intention to cause such damage.”

ConFor is now calling on the government to focus again on addressing the big issues facing all of England’s forests that were first raised with the minister last July.

“There are major challenges facing English forestry, including the threat from major energy companies and the previous government’s failure to protect and support commercial forestry or to tackle the lack of management of over half of England’s forests,” said Mr Goodall.

“Clearly there is a lot of work to be done in the coming months and it will be important to keep talking to government, taking the time to explain industry’s concerns and how they can be addressed.”

The Timber Pallet and Packaging Confederation, which had feared that the power companies would buy large areas of public forest as a source of wood for fuel leading to timber shortages, also said the government change of heart was the right move.

“The [sell off] proposals posed a series of potential threats to British businesses,” said TIMCON Secretariat Stuart Hex. “The government should be commended for listening, and responding to, our concerns. Timber pallets and packaging facilitate safe, economical and environmentally sound transport of huge volumes of products every day. Government thinking should always reflect this fact, whether we’re dealing with the policies on the sale of British forests, encouraging UK employment or subsidising wood burning as a source of energy.”  

Among the opponents of the government’s change of course was the Country Landowners Association (CL A), the main organisation representing private woodland owners in England. It said it regretted that privatisaton had been abandoned.  

“It is disappointing because we are instinctively in favour of private rather than public ownership and we know that private owners can manage woodlands just as well as the state,” said president William Worsley. “We are certain there are some areas of the public forest estate that could be better managed by the private sector, while still delivering a wide range of public benefits. After all, more than four-fifths of England’s woods are in private ownership and the owners provide an enormous amount of environmental and public benefit, at the same time as producing wood to build and heat our homes. Wood products, renewable energy, carbon sequestration, water protection, biodiversity and public access and enjoyment can be provided all our by forests and woodlands. “