I am suspicious of the amendment because it may extend the clause’s scope and intention far too widely. My ears pricked up when the hon. Member for Brecon and Radnorshire (Mr. Williams) mentioned unauthorised dog racing. In our part of the world, we have an old activity called hound trailing, which is popular in the Lake district and in my constituency. Indeed, we had an international—because somebody came from Cork—hound trail meeting the other Saturday, which was a good occasion. The amendment would catch that because the event takes place across a common.
I can envisage problems with informal, sensible activities on the village green that could be caught by the amendment. What about an impromptu football kick-about? What about flying a model aircraft or simply having a party? The amendments risk being far too draconian. As I understand it, authorised activities are a matter for the slightly sinister organisation referred to in the Bill as the ““appropriate national authority””—a Kafka-esque sounding body. If something is not authorised by the appropriate national authority, the activities that I mentioned could be caught by the amendment. It could have an unintended consequence of stopping people’s legitimate enjoyment of village greens.
Commons Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Peter Atkinson
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 29 June 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Commons Bill (HL).
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
448 c468 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 23:17:29 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_333875
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_333875
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_333875