UK Parliament / Open data

Commons Bill [HL]

Proceeding contribution from Earl Peel (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 25 October 2005. It occurred during Debate on bills and Committee proceeding on Commons Bill [HL].
I welcome the amendment tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Bach. It is absolutely right and proper that if a tenant farmer has the ability to buy his freehold, he should have equal rights on the common with other commoners. Having said that, I reiterate the concerns of some of my noble friends on the definition and who the registration authority will consult in its deliberations. I have been involved in the management of common land for a great deal longer than I care to remember—probably about 30 years. I have seen all manner of different management regimes in place, some of which may be regarded as good and some as bad, depending on your perspective. The great difficulty with the management of heather moor land, which is my principal concern, is that the introduction of subsidies in the 1947 Act has enabled farmers to introduce supplementary feed on to the common, which resulted in the heather declining. That is now a well recorded part of our commons history. Many of those difficulties have been overcome by the fact that English Nature has intervened and entered into management agreements with the owner or the commoners—a point we will elaborate on when dealing with the formation of commons associations. In the case of sites of special scientific interest—a lot of those commons are dedicated SSSIs, SPAs, SACs and so forth—many of those difficulties have now been overcome. It is perfectly clear what the objective is in the management of the common. But there are many other commons which do not have such designations where there is no clear indication of the principle objective of the management of the common. So, when the commons registration authority comes to its deliberation, I hope very much that it will consult not just Natural England but a commoners’ association, if such an association is in place. I hope that it will also consult the owner of the common, because for the process to be carried out effectively there must be a consensus of opinion. Therefore, I hope very much that the Minister can confirm to the Committee that such opinions will be sought and that such decisions will not be made in too dictatorial a fashion, so that everybody feels they are taking part in this crucial part of the future management of a common.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
674 c288-9GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top