Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Hamwee (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 21 April 2009. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL].


Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]

My noble friend went rather rapidly over the distinction between flooding, the tide and erosion or encroachment. Like him, I had a problem with the term "optional". I can see that it would be an "option" not to get your feet wet, but is it really a sensible option to fall into the void created by erosion? The clause seems to be dealing with very different circumstances but describing the remedy in the same way, which is not entirely appropriate.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
709 c1424 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Compensation Devolved matters Appeals Armed forces Decommissioning Costs Coastal areas Common land Delegated legislation Coastal erosion Land Licensing Dogs Liability Environment protection Ferries Energy Legislative competence Farms Inland waterways Land use Environment Agency Isles of Scilly Floods Isle of Wight Estuaries Local government Navigation Livestock Planning Ports Public consultation National Assembly for Wales Public footpaths Nature conservation Parish and town councils National parks Ministry of Defence Scotland Wales Rights of way Repairs and maintenance Shipping Seas and oceans Wildlife Rural areas Firing ranges Islands Natural England Lundy Island
Legislation
Marine and Coastal Access Bill (HL) 2008-09
National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk