Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 2 November 2005. It occurred during Committee proceeding and Debate on bill on Commons Bill [HL].


Commons Bill [HL]

We are not able to favour the request contained in the amendment to put the sort of representation that the noble Baroness seeks on a formal, statutory basis. Having said that, if there were a statutory consultation exercise involving the public about the matter to which she refers, an association could make a contribution to any proposals which may affect their area. I note the noble Baroness’s point about issues to do with certain areas, but we do not know where the associations will be formed. A commoners association, if it is established in a coastal area, may not be representative of all the interests in that area or, more broadly, all the users of the common. Therefore we would be concerned about making it statutory as a consultee. With the assurance that were there to be a statutory public consultation they would be able to make representations, I hope the noble Baroness will feel able to withdraw the amendment.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
675 c106-7GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Subjects
ICT Access Applications Agriculture Costs Common land Functions Land use Grazing land Local government Membership Management Maps Public opinion Registration Voting rights Transitional arrangements Wildlife Rules of procedure Voluntary work Sites of special scientific interest Commons councils Village greens
Legislation
Commons Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk