Proceeding contribution from Baroness Byford (Conservative) 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]
I apologise to the Deputy Chairman of Committees. She was not in the Chair earlier when I asked for this amendment to be degrouped. I am very grateful for the Minister’s response to the group of amendments that we have just debated, because clearly a right of appeal needs to be built into the Bill. I also believe that there should be some form of compensation, because areas of land may well be taken from those who own them to provide access, and that will be done in a compulsory fashion. I start by reminding the Committee of my membership of the National Farmers’ Union, the CLA, the Countryside Alliance and the National Trust, but it is the CLA and the NFU that have particularly raised the issue of compensation. The Minister said earlier that the Select Committee criticised the Government’s response to its recommendations on rights of appeal, and that is true also concerning the whole question of compensation. I turn, first, to the ninth report of the House of Commons Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, Session 2007-08. On page 20, it clearly says: ""The Bill should give Natural England the power to offer compensation to owners and occupiers who can demonstrate financial loss as a result of the coastal access provisions where such compensation is necessary to achieve the fair balance between public and private interests that the Bill requires"." Indeed, the noble Lord, Lord Greaves, and I both sat on the Joint Committee of both Houses. Again, its report says, on page 92, that most interested parties agree that compensation should be available in particular cases of demonstrable loss. There was also agreement that there should not be a presumption of compensation for all landowners and occupiers. Even though the Government are going to come up with some suggestion of right of appeal, they should also consider adding some form of compensation to the Bill. It is late and most noble Lords who are in the Chamber at the moment are well aware of this amendment, so without further ado I beg to move.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 709 c1462-3
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 11:05:42 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_548288
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_548288
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_548288