Commons Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 9:"Page 9, line 40, at end insert—" ““(   )   This section does not apply where the owner of the town or village green is a charity.”” The noble Duke said: My Lords, the main impetus behind the amendment is to be found in the Minister’s words on 28 November at col. 50. Our amendment at that time was an attempt to ensure that the Bill contained clear restrictions on the eligibility of urban land for registration as a town green. The National Playing Fields Association is concerned that the Minister’s reply to our case might be interpreted to mean that a valid application to create a town green or a playing field could rest on whether the field gates had been kept locked. Most playing fields are not locked and this amendment is an attempt to protect them from people who might prefer to have a common rather than playing fields and pitches. Exempting charity-owned land would be such a protection. Some of your Lordships may have come across this potential area of confusion. It is surely our duty as legislators to remove areas of confusion where possible. The situation is illustrated in the points that we have been given by the National Playing Fields Association, which I hope your Lordships will allow me to outline in full. The association has told us that it,"““is aware of a number of recreational fields registered as charities which have become registered as village greens under the existing 1965 Act at a later date . . . There is a strong argument, backed up informally by views received from the Legal Department of the Charity Commission, that this is inappropriate and capable of challenge in law . . . This is because the enjoyment of rights under a charitable trust is not ‘as of right’ of the inhabitants . . . The enjoyment of rights under a public trust is different from the enjoyment of rights directly enforceable through current commons legislation simply by virtue of being an inhabitant of an area . . . It would therefore be helpful if there could be a Ministerial statement making clear whether there is any intended exemption for charitable recreational land . . . Should this not be the case, it would still be helpful for the Government to provide a statement of guidance on this matter, hopefully supporting the informal view of the Charity Commission, which is consistent with advice previously given to the NPFA by our own legal advisor””." Our amendment is designed to provide clarity in this area. I beg to move.