UK Parliament / Open data

Commons Bill [HL]

Proceeding contribution from Lord Bach (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 25 October 2005. It occurred during Debate on bills and Committee proceeding on Commons Bill [HL].
moved Amendment No. 27:"Page 4, line 31, after ““except”” insert—" ““(a)   where the severance is authorised by or under any other Act; or (b)   ”” The noble Lord said: The amendments to which I shall speak form only part of this group. Members of the Committee will speak to their amendments when I have had the opportunity of moving Amendment No. 27. That amendment and Amendment No. 240 respond to concerns from West Berkshire Council about the impact of the repeal of Section 33 of the Greenham and Crookham Commons Act 2002 contained in Part 1 of Schedule 5. Section 33 of the Greenham and Crookham Commons Act already contains a prohibition on severance, but the provision also enables severance to take place under certain conditions. We see no reason why the general prohibition in Clause 9 should interfere with the consensual arrangements contained in the 2002 Act and approved by the House so recently. The amendments ensure that the prohibition in Clause 9 is subject to any exceptions contained in other legislation, and modify the repeal of Section 33 of the Greenham and Crookham Commons Act so that the exceptions contained in the Act remain effective. We are aware of only one other provision regarding severance in local legislation, in Section 8 of the Dartmoor Commons Act 1985. The Bill repeals that provision, because it would otherwise be duplicated by Clause 9. Amendment No. 31 would enable rights of common to be severed and transferred to statutory commons associations. Clause 9(3) already allows for Natural England and the Countryside Council for Wales to continue to acquire rights by severance. We have listened to representations from commoners and others, who said that it would be sensible for statutory commons associations to be able to manage rights in that way. We agree that this would be a useful adjunct to commons associations’ powers. The amendment appears to have the same purpose as Amendment No. 32, which has been tabled by the noble Baroness, Lady Byford, and I hope and perhaps trust that the Government’s amendment meets her approval. I beg to move.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
674 c295-6GC 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Back to top