The hon. Gentleman is of course quite wrong. I opposed the Act simply because I believed there was no need for it, and I have been proved absolutely right. Since it was passed, the number of walkers has collapsed; far fewer people go into the countryside than before the CROW Act was passed, and I am using precisely the same argument about the Bill.
I am strongly in favour of encouraging people into the countryside and on to the coastal paths. Two thirds of our coast is already satisfactorily pathed and people are making significant use of it. I do not believe the Bill does enough to encourage that use with regard to business. It could do more to help walkers reach the seaside businesses that would benefit. Islands were mentioned earlier, but the Government have not given enough thought to estuaries and precisely where the path will go. A whole variety of detailed matters could result in an extremely good idea being brought into some disrepute. I hope that in Committee the Government will think carefully about those aspects of the Bill and allow us all to be proud of the end product.
Marine and Coastal Access Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
James Gray
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 23 June 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Marine and Coastal Access Bill [Lords].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
494 c749 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:24:35 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_569744
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_569744
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_569744