I only hope that when the noble Earl was a Minister some years ago no one ever asked him a question like that. So far as Clause 5 is concerned, Epping Forest and certain other urban commons were excluded from registration under the 1965 Act because they were already regulated under local Acts or schemes, rights of common were no longer being exercised and the extent of the common land was well defined.
Open land in the Forest of Dean on the other hand is owned by the Crown and managed by the Forestry Commissioners. The Crown’s position is that the land is not subject to rights of common. So subsection (3), which repeats a similarly worded provision in the 1965 Act, is therefore for the avoidance of doubt.
Commons Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bach
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 25 October 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Commons Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
674 c280-1GC Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 02:32:36 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_269633
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_269633
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_269633