Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Livsey of Talgarth (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Monday, 14 November 2005. It occurred during Committee proceeding and Debate on bill on Commons Bill [HL].


Commons Bill [HL]

Is it possible to disagree only slightly with my noble friend? I want to make a couple of points. As I recall, Amendment No. 85 concerned commons associations and local authorities being able to manage unclaimed common land. While I quite agree with my noble friend about local authorities and the position that they may hold, I am very concerned about the effect of the amendment in relation to national parks, in particular. I say that because local authorities are democratically elected, while large sections—sometimes as much as 50 per cent—of the national parks are nominated either by the Secretary of State or by the First Minister of the National Assembly for Wales. It has been my experience that local authorities are sometimes more responsive, while national parks occasionally own common land with commoners on it exercising their rights. I am anxious that a non-elected body should not farm, for example, a large chunk of the 21,000 hectares or acres in Wales mentioned by my noble friend. I have been corrected. It is 21,000 hectares, which is a lot of land. These matters need to be considered as do, if I am correct in my assumption, the way in which they relate to Amendment No. 85.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
675 c275GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
Access Agriculture Construction Common land Land Enforcement Driving Environment protection Exemptions Local government Ownership Motor vehicles Protection Planning permission Powers Public interest Planning Management Property rights Registration Rights of way Wildlife Wind power Commons councils Village greens
Legislation
Commons Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk