I did not intend to take part in the debate because I got the Minister’s letter, but I want to support the noble Lord, Lord Judd—contrary-wise to the noble Lord, Lord Dixon-Smith. The looseness was already in the 1949 Act. The Lake District is in the part of the world in which the noble Lord, Lord Judd, and I live. I also declare an interest as vice chairman, or vice-president—I cannot remember which—of the Council for National Parks. In the Lake District, Windermere would fail the merit test, as would Ambleside, Hawkshead, Coniston, Keswick, Borrowdale. Penrith is outside, so it does not matter, but practically every village in the Lake District would fail. That shows that the merit case does not fit. It is right that the Government are paying considerable attention to sorting it out. It is a pity we cannot get it reversed in the courts beforehand, as that would be much easier. Nevertheless, I understand the Government’s predicament.
Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Chorley
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 27 February 2006.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
679 c86 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 20:13:26 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_302953
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_302953
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_302953