Commons Bill [HL]

This debate allows me to ask a question which properly is a stand-part question, but, nevertheless, is relevant. It was my understanding that the Bill was to provide that common rights should be attached to a dominant tenement; that is, to land. But, having talked to certain people close to my noble friend, it turns out that if the 1965 Act register on Gilwern common is—in my name and the name of other graziers—translated into the new register, that will have effect. Before I get on to the whole issue of severance, as I will in the next amendment, if it is the case that in my name I still have the rights, what is the point of all this severance stuff?