Commons Bill [HL]

I am grateful to the Minister. I presumed that that was the intention all along and it is very helpful. I wish to speak to Amendments Nos. 186 and 188, which are in our names. Amendment No. 186 illustrates our concern that a national authority, deemed appropriate by whomever, may step in and revoke a rule made by a commons association. To me, that suggests that an organisation such as Natural England or the Countryside Council for Wales will be able to overturn any decision made by commons associations. While the Minister may argue that this paragraph is a route of appeal—that can be the only reason that it would be supported—we on these Benches think that, if that is the case, it should be more precisely specified. Surely a more effective route of appeal could be set up through the commons commissioner. I understand that the chief commissioner is now merely a part-time post, in spite of the success of the post over the years. I hope that the Minister will agree to consider my amendment not only as a probing amendment properly to establish the relationship between the commons associations and national government but also as a prompt to consider the processes of appeal. I turn to Amendment No. 188. The Bill has resulted in a fairly heavy postbag, all of it from people and organisations with considerable knowledge and experience of their local commons. It is obvious that commons legislation must cater for a variety of circumstances. The national authority should not be in a position to revoke a rule without the membership of the association in question having the opportunity to explain the need for it.