Commons Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 2:"Page 1, line 11, after ““register”” insert ““the ownership of and the””" The noble Lord said: In moving Amendment No. 2 standing in my name, it may convenient to the Committee if I speak also to Amendments Nos. 5 and 33, although Amendment No. 33 is not entirely germane to the other two. I was unable to speak at Second Reading so I have now to declare my interests in the matter. I have a home in Wales. I own 33 acres of upland grassland in Radnorshire abutting Gilwern Hill, which is a common. I have grazing rights for 41 ewes or six horses on Gilwern Hill. I have let out the major proportion of my land on a farm business tenancy to a neighbouring farmer. I want to make it perfectly clear on the record where I am coming from. I cannot talk about common land or town and village greens other than in Radnorshire, but I imagine that the problems in Radnorshire are the same as the problems elsewhere. Recently the 28 graziers on Gilwern Hill decided to try and buy the common from the owner of the common, which is the Glanusk Estate—the Legge & Bourke family estate. We made an offer. It turned out to be ridiculously low in terms of the valuation that the alleged owners had put on the property. We then discovered that the title deeds for the common had been burnt in a fire in about 1750 and that the only evidence the Glanusk Estate could produce of ownership of the common were manorial maps, which our lawyers said were not such as the Land Registry would accept. All I am saying—and I hope that my noble friend understands this—is that where as commoners or graziers we will have to ensure that our entry on the register is right, as I understand it, I believe that it is up to the owner, or the alleged owner to prove that he, she or the trust is the actual owner of the common. The only way to do that is to prove it on the register. That point relates also to the other amendments in this group. I beg to move.