Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill

Clause 60 realigns the wording of the broads authority’s first two purposes with the wording used for the national parks—the two having moved apart when the national parks’ wording, but not that of the broads, was amended by the Environment Act 1995. Subsection (4) was inserted into the clause to prevent any increase in spending arising from the rewording of the first two purposes which did not—in answer to the noble Lord, Lord Greenway—relate to navigation from falling on either local authorities and thus, possibly, on their council tax payers—in response to the noble Duke, the Duke of Montrose—or the navigation toll payers. In practice, we do not expect Clause 62 to lead to any increase in spending, but subsection (4) provides a guarantee that, even if it did, the effects would not be borne by the local authority or boaters, except where navigation issues were the cause of the extra spending. This is intended to reassure local authorities and boaters, as well as to remove any question of hybridity, as without subsection (4), it might just be argued that the particular interests of the local authorities and boaters would require this measure to be addressed through private, rather than public, legislation. It does not change navigation rules on the navigation account, saying merely that increases should not be allowed to make the Bill hybrid. So in practice, removal of subsection (4) would mean that the Bill would have to be referred to the examiners of petitions for private Bills on the ground that it would be a prima facie hybrid. That referral could delay the Bill. I hope that, with that explanation, I have reassured the noble Duke and the noble Lord, Lord Greenway, and I invite the noble Duke to withdraw his amendment.