moved Amendment No. 192:"Page 19, line 22, at end insert ““to an adjacent commons association for a period not exceeding 12 calendar months””"
The noble Duke said: The paragraph in the Bill that allows for the transfer of rights, property and liabilities covers neither the destination nor the duration of such a transfer. The implication must be that English Nature may be involved.
It is obviously prudent to allow for the possibility that an association established by government may fail. However, surely it does not follow that a second attempt will also fail. The land is still there; the commoners and the graziers are still there; and the need for an association is still there, so all possible steps should be taken to re-establish one as soon as possible. In the mean time, an adjoining association would certainly be better placed than a national organisation to carry out a caretaking role. I beg to move.
Commons Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Duke of Montrose
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 9 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Commons Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
675 c238GC Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:28:25 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_276002
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_276002
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_276002