As chair of the all-party cycling group, may I take this opportunity to raise an issue that is of particular concern to the cycling community? I refer to rights of way for cyclists in the countryside, 2,000 of whom have contacted their Members of Parliament. That is reflected in cross-party concern, and I am grateful to the right hon. Member for North-West Hampshire (Sir George Young), the hon. Member for Brecon and Radnorshire (Mr. Williams) and my hon. Friends the Members for Llanelli (Nia Griffith), for Stroud (Mr. Drew) and for City of York (Hugh Bayley) for taking their place in the Chamber to show their concern. I am confident that the concern that the cycling world has expressed to the Department has struck a chord and that the Department appreciates that we all want to go in the same direction.
In short, the problem comes down to rights of way in the countryside. Horse riders have bridleways and walkers have footpaths, but it is unclear what cyclists have. I know that many discussions between DEFRA and cycling organisations took place during the recess, and it is clear that we want the same thing—proper access to the countryside for cyclists. It took the very invention of the bicycle to give many working people access to the countryside for the first time, and we want to ensure that their rights are instilled properly in law.
DEFRA’s position has been that the law is already clear enough, but the cycling world’s position is that it is not. When we go touring around the countryside, our panniers are already full of many other things and we would rather not have to arm ourselves with the number of documents that we might need to argue with landlords that we perhaps have the right of access to a particular piece of land. We do not have room for copies of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 and a number of inspectors’ decisions. We do not want to have a working knowledge of Pepper v. Hart, some of the compelling reasons for the judgment in IRC v. Dowdall and O’Mahoney in 1952, or the appeal case on page 401, with particular reference to the judgment of Lord Radcliffe on page 426. We do not want all of that or to have to carry a copy of Hansard; we just want the law to be made clear.
We would therefore like an undertaking from the Minister that he will take a serious look at plugging the hole in the law, meet people from the cycling world and sort the matter out in another place. I ask for that so that my inner-city constituents can freely enjoy the delights of south Dorset on bicycle. How we get to south Dorset and ensure that the trains are more friendly towards carrying bicycles is another issue for another time and, I am sure that the Minister will be pleased to hear, for another Department. Let us take one spin of the wheel at a time.
Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Emily Thornberry
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 11 October 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
437 c212-3 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:34:32 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_264935
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_264935
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_264935