UK Parliament / Open data

Commons Bill [HL]

Proceeding contribution from Duke of Montrose (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 30 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bills on Commons Bill [HL] 2005-06.
My Lords, we welcome the amendments to Clause 43. In Committee, we requested that more purposes be added to the specified set, and we are pleased to see that the protection of heritage has been listed as a priority on the face of the Bill. We also raised the question of animal welfare and, to that extent, we wish to support the amendment moved by the noble Lord, Lord Livsey. However, I understand that the problem is that to protect animals fences would have to be erected, which does not always tally with the Government’s planned treatment of common land. Will the Minister answer that point when he replies? The phrase ““any land”” in sub-paragraph (b)(i) caught my attention. It seems to be rather woolly. Surely ““any land”” includes ““land of a specified description””, used in sub-paragraph (b)(ii). Can the Minister explain why two sub-paragraphs are needed? The noble Earl, Lord Peel, spoke to his amendment, which would oblige the national authority to make an order within 12 months. Although the new clause inserted in Committee is an improvement and gives power to the Government to carry out their stated objectives of making orders so that minor works and management works are taken out of the need for consent, there is, as the noble Earl suggested, no obligation on the Government to make regulations, nor is there any definition of what should go in them. Provision for the national authority to be obliged to make an order is intended to press that point, although there is no provision about what needs to be in the order. The object is to make the point, rather than to succeed.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

676 c275-6 

Session

2005-06

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords chamber
Back to top