Should gardening be part of government policy?
Over the fence Would our cherished pastime benefit from being included in government policy or should it be kept out of Westminster?
Gardening projects in the prison system have multiple benefits It is more likely to identify gardening with the Nanny State
The UK has a reputation as a nation of gardeners and the benefits society can gain from horticulture are many, including urban regeneration, expanding food production, new streams of income and enhancing health and well-being. I have been working to highlight these benefits, arguing that horticulture must be brought into government policy.
Studies have shown that engagement with plants and green spaces is therapeutic, stimulating interest and a daily purpose where other techniques have failed. So I’ve encouraged the Health Department to include eco therapies and ‘green’ prescriptions in treatments for mental health conditions and obesity. Gardening projects in the prisons system also have multiple benefits, providing produce for prison kitchens and boosting the self-confidence, skills and employment opportunities of those taking part, with scope to reduce re-offending rates. Garden tourism contributes an incredible £7.8 billion to the economy and government could help expand this sector with grants to encourage partnerships between business, communities and local authorities. In addition, our apprenticeship programme can make a real difference in closing the horticultural skills gap nationwide. There’s also scope for increasing home-grown production of trees and plants to supply garden centres and landscape gardeners. Gardens are a personal passion but some judiciously placed government policies could enable the whole of society to enjoy its wider benefits and I would like to see a greater cross-departmental, holistic approach to environmental policy.
I think ‘pastime’ is such a dreadful word and idea – it suggests a mindless activity for the bored and boring middle aged. It’s only slightly worse than the idea that we are all ‘passionate’ about making ‘lovely’ gardens. We may be – but do we want to be patronised this way? Gardens are good for the economy, judging by the number of coach parties which visit our gardens from all over the world. And I am sure gardening is good for us, though the benefits of exercise in the treatment of obesity are exaggerated. Losing weight is hard for many of us and the idea of a GP handing you a prescription to go weeding when you’re distressed about your size is awful. I’ve worked with people suffering from mental health issues and, as in the case of obesity, I am aware that offering gardening is palliative care and comfort in the absence of any real cure. Adding the dead hand of government is more likely to identify gardening with the loathed Nanny State, and the idea of their involvement ignores the work that is already thriving in all these areas, supported by private enterprise and charities.
Increasing awareness of the value of horticulture as a career, as a critical part of our economy and a business opportunity, is more likely to be achieved by updating its image. This might be better achieved by finding a way to replace the idea of polite afternoon teas and pointless double digging with something more dynamic and assertive. I remember speaking on Radio 4’s Today programme about the thinkinGardens community** and John Humphrys huffing at the end, ‘What is there to think about, about gardens?’. It’s about time he knew.