---

Commons Bill [HL]

My Lords, I spoke on this issue in Committee. Like my noble friend Lord Caithness, I have great sympathy with certain aspects of these amendments and I hope that the Government will think kindly about them. My noble friend remarked that he would much prefer these rights to be purchased by local people, by farmers who farm these areas, rather than by various public bodies. He mentioned various environmental bodies. I think particularly of the Lake District, which I represented for 33 years in another place. I would hate to see the National Trust purchasing grazing rights in the Lake District. The best part of 15 years ago, when the National Trust’s holding in the Lake District National Park was approaching 25 per cent, I started saying that 25 per cent of a national park was enough for any body to control and that I hoped the National Trust would not go on building up its land holding and land rights in the Lake District. I am happy for another body to be set up to do similar things to those done by the National Trust, as long as it is a separate body. But for the National Trust to dominate and control more than 25 per cent of the land in the Lake District National Park would be undesirable. I would hate to support legislation that made it possible for the National Trust to do so. There is no doubt that the National Trust is empire-building, because it was extremely angry when I started saying that 25 per cent was enough for any one body. I have always had the impression that it is not interested in limiting its dominance to 25 per cent of the national park. Therefore, we ought to draw the line now, just in case other people get hold of bodies like the National Trust and encourage bigger landholding and rights over land. That is the main reason why I am in sympathy with these amendments.