Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Greaves (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]

I tabled the question whether Clause 296 should stand part. I did that not because I wish to remove the clause but because, as the noble Earl, Lord Cathcart, has just admitted, nobody put down any amendments to it and that was the only way I could think of to be able to stand up and say something. I want to welcome the clause, so it was just a procedural device. This matter takes us back to the debates we had on the CROW Bill nine years ago when there was quite a consensus across the Chamber that the reduced liability that owners and occupiers have under that legislation in relation to natural features should apply to all physical features. We never managed to get that to a vote for whatever reasons under the CROW Act, and in any case it was never passed. Since then, on CROW and access land the position has been that there is reduced occupier’s liability as regards natural features but not as far as manmade physical features. One only has to think of crags that have been partly quarried and you start to ask what is manmade and what is natural. In the Derbyshire Edges you might go along the bottom of a crag and trip over a natural bolder. Then you might trip over a millstone that was left there when they stopped making millstones. Therefore, the distinction between the two is not very clear. I want very much to welcome the fact that the land is defined as a physical feature of whatever kind and not just a natural feature. Looking to the future, I would hope that we might find an opportunity to amend the law on CROW access land to come into line with what will be the provisions on coastal access. That is for the future. In the mean time, I simply want greatly to welcome Clause 296. As I think this is the last time I shall speak, probably in Committee but certainly on Part 9 of the Bill, I want to thank the Ministers, the Government and the Bill team for the huge amount of time, effort and co-operation that we have had from them on consideration of Part 9. I am sure that on this part of the Bill at least this effort has borne dividends in the huge amount of consensus there is in relation to it. It is very different from the CROW Bill nine years ago. On behalf of the Liberal Democrats I would like to thank the Government and all their people for the help we have had. We look forward to locking horns again on Report.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
709 c1477-8 
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