Proceeding contribution from Earl Cathcart (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 1 June 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill on Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL].
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [HL]
My Lords, my amendment seeks to ensure that the coastal route and margin is properly updated to take account of changes in land use. I know that we have already had an interesting discussion about how the coastal route will affect, and be affected by, any planning decisions, and I was glad to hear the Minister’s reassurances that the coastal route and its associated margin will not sterilise the land. My amendment is targeted not at the changes in land use that require planning permission but at decisions about land use that will not require planning permission. In particular, many of the decisions that a farmer might make about a field do not require planning permission but might significantly affect the route and margin. I would be grateful to hear from the Minister how a decision to plough up a field that was previously used for grazing or a decision to plant a wood that necessitated rabbit fencing might affect the route and margin. What if a farmer decides to drain a field, necessitating the digging of a drainage ditch that crosses the route? I understand that if a farmer cannot block access, perhaps by new fencing, he must ensure that there is a method of climbing over the new obstacle. Who then bears the cost of a stile or a grid? The land covered by the route and margin will, without doubt, change over time. As it stands, Natural England has the necessary powers to reassess a report, but there appears to be no mechanism for ensuring such a review as and when it is needed. My amendment therefore seeks to allow, ""A person with a relevant interest in affected land"," to, ""notify Natural England of a change in land use and request a review of the route"," and, ""Where Natural England is informed of a change in land use under subsection (1) above but decides that a review of the route is not necessary, they shall inform the person of their reasons"." This would be a useful provision in that it would not only help Natural England but make the coastal route more user-friendly if a new route was agreed either on a permanent or a temporary basis. I beg to move.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 711 c53-4
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Access Birds Coastal areas Devolution Crown dependencies British overseas territories Cycling Coastal erosion Land Leisure Gun sports Environment protection Exemptions Horse riding Isle of Man Gibraltar Internet International law Estuaries Local government Ownership Parking Planning permission Planning Ports Privacy Public transport Maps Public footpaths Nature conservation Parish and town councils National parks Public inquiries Safety Rights of way Seas and oceans Wildlife Planning Inspectorate Jersey Guernsey Natural England
- 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 11:42:31 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_562216
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_562216
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_562216