View PDF - United Kingdom Parliament

63 Marine and Coastal Access Bill 26 OCTOBER 2009 Marine and Coastal Access Bill 64
[Lords]
[Lords]
[Huw Irranca-Davies]
that way, as having a genuine coastal path and spreading
room was a major aspiration of his. If we succeed in
introducing the Bill with cross-party support, the idea
of recognising his contribution would have my personal
support. Many of the organisations out there—whether
the Ramblers Association, the British Mountaineering
Council or others—would also welcome marking his
contribution in some way.
Mr. Benyon: Talk of jam doughnuts has excited me
and inspired me to see whether I can get a couple of
points on the record. Does the Minister agree that we
want to go to the best bits—that is, to the jam—first?
Natural England should be looking at prioritising areas
that will enhance tourism—areas where the path is
needed and asked for by local organisations, pubs,
village shops and others who will benefit from the
tourism that it will bring. Will he also confirm, as I
think he did in Committee, that the way Natural England
approaches the issue is vital? It needs to understand, for
example, that in parts of the south-west there is an
existing path, maintained in some cases by landowners
at their personal expense and liability, that may not go
exactly along the coast. However, if the route takes
people across a cliff top, the walker gets a better view.
The path will already be there, but it will not be driving
the route across the front of a caravan park that is
actually on the coast. That flexibility needs to be reflected
in how the Bill progresses.
Huw Irranca-Davies: Yes, indeed. The hon. Gentleman
recognises the nature of the Bill and how the coastal
path provisions have been made, in that it starts from
the walking of the route. The Bill leads from there to the
engagement needed with the various landowners and
those who are interested in the coastal path to ensure,
very much with local determination, that the best route
is picked. The work of the south-west access forums has
been a good model of how that approach works. We
want it to be rolled out further. I will return to that issue
in a moment, but, where possible, we also want access
to parks and gardens to be opened up.
The hon. Gentleman’s amendment 35 seeks to change
one of the fundamental principles underpinning part 9
of the Bill, namely the coastal access duty in clause 291.
Here we come to the meat of the issue. I understand
why he is probing, but I hope that he might consider
withdrawing the amendment once I have explained my
reasons. The coastal access duty requires the Secretary
of State and Natural England to secure two prime
objectives. The first objective, as my hon. Friends have
remarked, is to have a long-distance route or routes for
the whole of the English coast that is accessible to the
public for journeys on foot, including by ferry if appropriate,
which is an issue that my hon. Friends mentioned to
which I shall return. The second objective, which is
associated with the route or routes, is to have a wider
margin of recreational land available for the public on
foot for enjoyment in conjunction with the route.
Amendment 35 seeks to amend the second objective
and would make the coastal access duty much weaker
than the Government propose. It would thereby inhibit
the delivery of the Government’s commitment to providing
access to the whole of our wonderful coastline. The
effect of the amendment would be to make the requirement
to establish the coastal margin not absolute, but
discretionary. I therefore cannot support the amendment.
It strikes at the very heart of the Government’s vision of
allowing people access to the coastline so that they can
play, paddle, explore and gain an understanding of the
wealth of our coastal environment. Realising that vision
requires a route around the whole of the English coast
that is accessible by members of the public for recreational
journeys on foot as well as a margin of land accessible
to the public for the purposes of its enjoyment by them
in conjunction with that route or otherwise.
Agreeing to the amendment would curtail that vision
to a route with much more limited access. It would also
frustrate user groups and members of the public alike,
including many user groups that have campaigned ardently
for that coastal access provision. We have always made
it clear that at the heart of our proposals for improving
access to the English coast under the Bill is, as the hon.
Gentleman mentioned, the extensive consultation process
that Natural England will be required to undertake
with local interests in proposing the coastal route. Land
managers, local access forums and local authorities,
both of which I have met repeatedly on the issue, as well
as representatives of recreational interest, wildlife and
other interest groups will all be a key part of the
approach adopted in designing the access corridor.
As with open access, I recognise that there may be
occasions where access to the coast might cause a
problem. Natural England will have to consider the
need for restrictions and exclusions. We debated that
extensively in Committee, and it has been debated in the
other place too. Those restrictions and exclusions will
be considered as part of Natural England’s coastal
report for each stretch of coast that must be approved
by the Secretary of State. After the initial alignment
process, landowners and those with an interest in land
will be able to apply for further restrictions if circumstances
change and they will have a right of appeal if these are
not agreed.
The Bill also requires Natural England to prepare a
scheme setting out the approach that it will take in
discharging its coastal access duty that must be approved
by the Secretary of State. A draft of that scheme has
already been published and, once again, Natural England
will consult shortly on a further draft for improvements.
Indeed, Natural England has invited representatives
from a number of our key stakeholders to a meeting
next week to discuss the draft scheme.
Mr. Benyon: The Minister mentioned local access
forums. They are feeling a little unloved at the moment,
so will he give his leadership and ensure that they are
genuinely consulted? Local access forums have a wealth
of experience and understand what is required in delivering
greater access, and they do that for next to nothing.
They are a cheap and welcome addition to the expertise
that already exists, but the Minister might like to put his
weight behind ensuring that they feel part of the process.
Huw Irranca-Davies: The hon. Gentleman makes a
good point. I met the local access forums two weeks
ago, and they want to play a pivotal role in the coastal
routes’ development. Their members have expertise,
they are volunteers, and they know the routes and the
lie of the land. I cannot conceive how local access
forums would not be part and parcel of the coastal
routes’ development.