My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 5 to 12. Amendments Nos. 5 and 8 to 12 respond to concerns raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Byford, at Third Reading that land on which houses had recently been built might nevertheless meet the criteria for registration as a green under Clause 15. The situation might arise if land had already been used by local inhabitants, as of right, for lawful sports and pastimes for at least 20 years but development then took place.
We amended the Bill in another place to deal with this point, but colleagues in another place then argued that it was also necessary to rule out registration of land that is still to be developed under a significant building project that has already begun. Again we listened, and although we have not been given any real-life examples these amendments deal with those concerns. If construction works had begun before the date in Amendment No. 10—23 June 2006, when we tabled it—it would not be possible to register any part of the land where works under the same planning permission would in due course make the land unusable for public recreation. We intend ““construction works”” to mean actual building works, not initial site-preparation works such as perimeter fencing, site clearance or levelling, waste removal or exploratory work. It will be for the authorities and courts to decide, based on the particular circumstances of each case.
The amendments are a substantial change from where we started. They are an even bigger departure from the old principles of customary law on which the greens registration law was based. They would more likely have made the development unlawful than protect it, so is a good example of flexibility to change the Bill to address practical difficulties.
Amendments Nos. 6 and 7 respond to a recent House of Lords judgment on the Trap Grounds case, which considered the effect of the words originally used in the Bill to describe the type of inhabitants whose use of land might warrant its registration as a green. The original words, taken directly from the current definition in the Commons Registration Act 1965, were, "““the inhabitants of any locality, or of any neighbourhood within a locality””."
The noble and learned Lord, Lord Hoffmann, spelt out in Trap Grounds that ““within a locality”” should be taken, if appropriate, to mean ““within a locality or localities””, therefore resolving an earlier concern on this which had led to an amendment in this House to simplify the wording to refer instead just to ““local inhabitants””. The doubts are now resolved about original formulation, so we need to revert to it to ensure that the intended meaning is clearly understood.
Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 5 to 12.—(Lord Rooker.)
Commons Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Rooker
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 17 July 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Commons Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
684 c1004-5 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:03:48 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_338138
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_338138
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_338138