UK Parliament / Open data

Commons Bill [HL]

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Byford (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 9 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bills and Committee proceeding on Commons Bill [HL].
moved Amendment No. 169:"Page 16, line 40, leave out paragraph (b)." The noble Baroness said: In moving Amendment No. 169, I shall speak also to Amendment No. 172 in this group. I want to take the opportunity to listen to what other noble Lords have to say when speaking to their amendments before I return to my own. At an earlier sitting we had a long debate about the public interest, so I shall not repeat that conversation. However, I seek clarification on the use of the phrase in subsection (6)(b). Amendment No. 169 is a probing amendment to ask the Government what they mean by the term ““public interest”” here. Does it refer only to the commoners, to those living within the common area, or does it cover the wider public interest? I am not clear when the subsection starts with the words:"““A commons association must discharge its functions for the purpose””" and goes on to refer to,"““the public interest in relation to the land for which it is established””." Who, in this context, is regarded as being included in the ““public interest””? I turn now to Amendment No. 172. In this country a number of householders have had to buy the right to access their own homes by vehicle. In the main these are people who have acquired properties situated on the edge of village greens or on common land where property developers had gained permission to build, but for some reason no one had thought about vehicular access. Perhaps the Minister, when she comes to reply, will be in a position to make a definite statement about the current position in law and will prove that there is no need for our amendment. Until she does, we are concerned lest those who have paid—and some of them dearly—for the right to drive across the common land to their own homes will be disadvantaged by the Bill. It may well be that other Bills overtake it. However, we do not feel that the protection of public rights of access to any area of land covers private rights, nor do we feel that in drafting this paragraph the Government were thinking of those who did buy rights. I hope that that is clear. I beg to move.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

675 c208-9GC 

Session

2005-06

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top