Commons Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 89:"Page 12, line 4, at end insert—" ““(   )   The rectification of mistakes under Schedule 1 must be completed by 28th June 2015.”” The noble Duke said: In moving Amendment No. 89, I shall speak to Amendments Nos. 91, 97, 99, 102, 109 and 112 as well. On Amendment No. 89, the provisions on severance are deemed to have come into force on 28 June this year. It seems reasonable to limit the length of time available for putting right mistakes made under the Commons Registration Act 1965. The CROW Act does so in relation to the registration of rights of way, and has allowed researchers and local authorities until 1 January 2026. But the paths to which it relates go back in time to before 1949. In the circumstances, 10 years for correcting errors made as a result of the application of the 1965 Act seems adequate and in keeping with the other legislation. The actual date is designed to maintain a unity of approach across the Bill. On Amendments Nos. 91, 97, 102 and 109, and in an amendment to Clause 21, it has been suggested that all applications relating to attempts to register land under the 1965 Act should have been completed by 28 June 2015. It is not possible even to guess at the number of such attempts that have been made since 1965. It is obviously not possible to estimate how many of those that were will be subject to a registration application now. Nor is it feasible to predict the pattern of such application across the country. Presumably, some counties will have many more than others, and some may have none at all. All these applications will have to be dealt with. There may be disagreements and disputes but the commons registration authority has to be satisfied that the grounds for an application are correct. The process may take days, or even months. The authorities must have a date beyond which no further applications are allowed. Finally, Amendment No. 109 would also insert the date 28 June 2012. A transitional provision should be less than allowed for completion, so we are suggesting seven years from 28 June 2005. Hence, the operative date for severance qualification would be 28 June 2005. Exactly seven years later, we would see the end of the transitional period for rectification of mistakes under the 1965 Act, and exactly three years after that, the whole process would come to an end. The exact dates are not in fact as important as the principle that all processes of change should have deadlines. This is not quite the same as ““targets””, because deadlines do not allow for slippage. Either they are met or they are missed. If it is the latter, then it is too late. In Amendment No. 112 to Schedule 2, we have suggested an amendment to Clause 22 that the transitional period should last to 28 June 2012. Defra has reportedly indicated to interested parties that it would like this period to last only three years. Apparently, however, it subsequently also indicated that this timetable might vary across the country from area to area. Clause 53(1) would give the power to commence the transition period at different times in different areas. Does the Minister’s department have any solid basis for this? Has it, for instance, compiled figures showing the number of qualifying events which were not registered under the 1965 Act? Does the department have any indication of how these are distributed across the country? Are they mainly rural, mainly urban or a fairly even mix? Have they studied the pattern of applications arising under the rights of way legislation? If so, have they used that data to calculate the amount of work that retrospective registration of greens might cause? The RSPB is concerned lest this process is either so pressurised that errors are made and those holding rights of common are not given every opportunity to register their interest in the land, or so relaxed that nothing is done for years. They wish to see commons registration authorities supported in working towards the attainment of the PSA target for SSSI-favourable condition by 2010, thereby also facilitating entry by commoners into agri-environment schemes. They point out that until things are sorted out, SSSIs on affected common land are likely to continue to degrade. I beg to move.