I am pleased to follow the right hon. Member for Bracknell (Mr. Mackay). His important points reflect the haphazard nature of rights of way legislation, which has grown and been amended over the years. In many respects, there is confusion. His point is similar to that made by my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Emily Thornberry). I am unclear about how part 6 affects the rights of cyclists. I am pretty clear in my mind that it does not affect the established rights of cyclists, but what is more moot and questionable is whether they lose the right to claim new routes, which is how it appears. A separate category for cyclists in rights of way legislation is not clearly set out. I cycle, although I do not fill my panniers with the books and texts talked about. It is clearly right, however, that those of us who advocate a right to walk in the countryside should also secure the rights of people who want to cycle in the countryside.
I have looked closely at new clause 21. I do not think that it does the task that my hon. Friend anticipates, but she is versed in these matters and I am not. However, I back her request that we need to examine the matter closely during the Bill’s remaining stages. I am confident that the Minister will do that. He and his officials have worked hard on part 6. There has been a great deal of movement. The Department accepted that there had been a flood of claims. That was dismissed early on, but as we examined the matter, the Minister accepted that there was a problem. As the hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire (Mr. Paice) said, the Minister was kind enough to publish—unusually, in many respects—the legal advice that he received. I am grateful to him for doing that.
I stress that concern is felt on both sides of the Chamber in both Houses, and it has substantial support from the organisations that have an interest. I know that the Minister is listening to that substantial lobby. I am grateful that he met me and representatives of the green lanes protection group in September, when we discussed the counsel’s opinion that the GLPG had obtained from John Hobson, a leading expert in the subject. As the hon. Member for South-East Cambridgeshire said, the Hobson opinion is clear that private rights and access, which give rise to human rights issues, are tackled in amendments Nos. 12 and 13. I support them and hope that the Minister will consider them carefully.
The essential issue is that of commencement. The Hobson opinion closely considers that, and it has been shared across the country with solicitors who have long experience in such matters. It is complicated, but in relative terms its core is straightforward. Part 6 extinguishes the right to use mechanically propelled vehicles on areas covered by new claims. All of us support that. It must be the case that if we are prepared to back that view—there is almost universal consensus for it across the country, with few exceptions—we should do it sooner rather than later.
There is no case for delay. Hobson clearly says that the legislation can be implemented immediately because the claims are just that—claims. They have not been established in law. By itself, a claim has no validity. However, the claims are stacking up, and the Minister would be wise to introduce an early commencement date. There are plenty of opportunities to do that. It could be on Royal Assent or 19 May, the day on which the Bill was published. It clearly is the case—it has been demonstrated thoroughly in the debate—that groups of people across the country are stacking up claims. What is more, they are being paid for it. That is a most unsatisfactory situation.
I am grateful for the movement on matters so far. Following our meeting on 22 September, the Minister kindly wrote to me. In a letter dated 3 October, he stated:"““I said that I would give you a very clear idea at the Commons Report Stage of how we intend to proceed on this issue.””"
I look forward to his statement. He will let us know of his decision, and an early intervention might help us. I promise him that we will look closely at what he has to say. I am delighted with part 6. If its provisions are right in the future, they should be right now.
Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Paddy Tipping
(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 c216-8 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 00:14:16 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_264939
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_264939
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_264939