Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Bach (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 27 February 2006. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill.


Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill

had given notice of his intention to move Amendment No. 305:"Before Clause 56, insert the following new clause—" ““CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATING NATIONAL PARKS (1)   In section 5(2) of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949 (c. 97) (criteria for designating National Parks), for paragraphs (a) and (b) substitute— ““(a)   their natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage, and (b)   the fact that, having regard both to their character and to their position in relation to centres of population, they afford, or could be used to promote, opportunities for open-air recreation and the understanding and enjoyment of their special qualities by the public,””. (2)   Subsection (1) applies for the purposes of the confirmation or variation on or after the day on which this section comes into force of orders made before that day as it applies for the purposes of the confirmation or variation of orders made on or after that day.”” The noble Lord said: This group of amendments is intended to reverse the recent Meyrick judgment. It serves to amend Section 5 of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949, and its purpose is to re-establish the link, which we had always assumed to exist until Meyrick, between the purposes that national parks are expected to deliver and the criteria for choosing areas to become national parks. The Countryside Agency was nervous that the drafting could be interpreted to mean that all three of those criteria—natural beauty, wildlife, and cultural heritage—would have to be met before land was designated. The intention, and the current practice, is that wildlife and cultural heritage considerations are factored into the natural beauty assessment rather than being free-standing tests in their own right. As a consequence of the Countryside Agency’s view, which has some merit, we have put in train a new series of amendments to deal with that point. I wrote to noble Lords earlier today, and I hope that many of them will have received the letter. If not I can only apologise. I do not intend to move Amendment No. 305 or the other government amendments in this group at Committee stage. I will return with government amendments on Report. [Amendment No. 305 not moved.] Clause 56 [Procedure for orders designating National Parks]: [Amendment No. 306 not moved.] Clause 56 agreed to.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
679 c79-80 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Access Animal welfare Codes of practice Birds Agriculture Badgers Countryside Biodiversity Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species Deer Land Environment protection Environment Infectious diseases Land use Imports Powers of entry Protection Nature conservation Pesticides National parks Trade Rights of way Right of search Wildlife Road signs and markings Rural areas Seals Sites of special scientific interest Avian influenza Parrots Natural England Bracken
Legislation
Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk