Natural Environment and Rural Communities Bill

My Lords, I thank the noble Baroness for raising this interesting issue and for explaining in more detail what she had in mind when she tabled this far-reaching amendment. Clause 100 is designed simply to clarify what should happen when Natural England either enters into conservation management agreements or sets up experimental schemes over Crown land, which includes significant areas of land and much of the foreshore and seabed. I understand that her intention is rather different; it is to enable the Crown Estate to make it easier for local community groups to have easier and perhaps cheaper access to Crown land, particularly the foreshore and seabed for local public interest purposes such as renewable electricity generation projects—to give an example that she has used previously. As to the specific point raised by the noble Baroness about the Crown Estate and the obligation to seek the highest possible price, I can confirm that this is enshrined in primary legislation. Section 3(1) of the Crown Estate Act 1961 obliges the commissioners only to sell or license Crown Estate land for the best consideration in money or moneys-worth which, in their opinion, can reasonably be obtained having regard to all the circumstances of the case. Subsection (6) details the extent of discretion available to commissioners and factors that they may take into account. For instance, they may take into account as part of the consideration any benefit conferred on the Crown Estate by improvements or executed works that are without cost to the Crown Estate. I believe that is the kind of example that the noble Baroness is interested in exploring. Additionally, in Section 4 in relation to grants for public or charitable purposes, there are examples of a limited number of circumstances where for development, improvement or general benefit of the land, the commissioners, with the consent of the Queen, may dispose of or license land for less than the best consideration achievable. Encouragement of community projects and schemes of this kind is an important ambition. It would, however, take much more wide-ranging changes to the law relating to Crown land and development control legislation than this amendment—or, indeed, the Bill—can possibly deliver. For that reason, we are not able to accept the amendment. However, we will shortly be publishing a consultation document on a range of issues in relation to the management of human activity in the marine environment as part of the process of developing proposals for a marine Bill. We are not seeking to address the specific issue raised by the noble Baroness but we will be proposing changes that will streamline some of the regulatory regimes that license certain activities. This will make these regimes easier to understand and make it simpler to gain the necessary licences to undertake the kind of local offshore renewable energy projects about which the noble Baroness is particularly concerned. As I look around the Chamber, I know that many noble Lords who have taken part in debates on the Bill will be only too happy to avail themselves of an opportunity to get involved in consultation on that document. They have a great deal of interest in the marine environment and will want to be fully involved in the process of the development of the marine Bill. The noble Lord, Lord Livsey, referred to the particular circumstances around the coast of Wales. I am quite sure that when the Bill comes forward we can share our experiences of the beauties of Cardigan Bay.