Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill

moved Amendment No. 143:"Page 27, line 36, leave out subsection (4) and insert—" ““(4)   Where, immediately before commencement, the exercise of an existing public right of way to which subsection (1) applies enabled access with vehicles to any land to be obtained by a person with an interest in that land, the right becomes a private right of way at all times and for all purposes for the benefit of that land and all parts thereof.”” The noble Baroness said: My Lords, in moving the amendment, I shall speak also to Amendment No. 155. Some occupiers of land rely on public vehicular rights lawfully to gain access to their properties. Some such ways may not have been recorded as byways. The Minister and the Government have recognised the need to protect occupiers’ ability to use such rights while extinguishing a general public right. A simple solution to this problem would be to draft a private right of way clause that reflected the existing public right. It would appear that the Government have sought to reflect a broad private right of way via Clause 65(4). However, the drafting is complicated. The amendment would achieve a simple reflection of the existing public rights of access to land, but it would be restricted to a private right of way. At the very least, it would be helpful if the Minister stated that Clause 65(4) truly reflects the current right of access enjoyed by properties served by public routes. I might speak to Amendment No. 155. 9.45 pm At present, the traffic regulation order can be made by traffic authorities to control any form of traffic. There is very limited protection under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 for access to property served by a way over which a TRO has been made. The power to make those orders is extended by Clause 70 to national park authorities. The TROs can be made not only because of the damage or danger to the public, but also due to other considerations such as conserving or enhancing the natural beauty of that area, as could be the case for national park authorities. As the Bill stands, national park authorities could make a traffic regulation order to prevent private access to premises on many occasions where such access, although longstanding and essential to the occupier, has an impact upon, for example, the amenity of that area. The only protection that exists for access to private premises with vehicles is that it cannot be prevented for more than eight hours in every 24 hours. We debated that in Committee, and raised the issue of those who work the land who cannot just work it for eight hours every day, let alone other businesses. In reality, for a business premises eight hours during a day could be crippling. Even that safeguard can be ignored where there is a need to preserve or improve the amenity of an area by prohibiting or restricting access by heavy commercial vehicles, in Section 3 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. We believe a traffic regulation order that affects private access could have serious consequences for many farmers who live and work in national parks, as well as having the potential to have an impact on other rural businesses. This amendment is designed to ensure that the power is as restricted as we first considered, so that the TROs will be made by national park authorities only to control recreational access with vehicles. I beg to move.