Clause16
Commons Bill [Lords]
4:00 pm
David Drew (Stroud, Labour)
I shall take up where Ileft off. Having chatted to my hon. Friend the Whip, I shall be evenbriefer than Ithought.
The point ofthe amendments is to sort out the issue of the possible exchange ofland. Amendment No. 71 would ensure that there is no de minimis size ofland resulting in land being nibbled away. It would also impose a timeconstraint restricting the degree to which land can be released insuccessive periods, so that we do not see it gone beforelong.
Amendment No.72 is straightforward. It would make it clear that it is wrong toprovide a piece of so-called open space as an alternative to theconstituted village green or common land. I am sure that that ruse hasbeen played on all hon. Members: someone offers the village what wasalready a piece of open space on the grounds that it is secured forever and a day, when the village is losing a piece of common land thatis just as valuable or even more valuable. I hope that that amendmentis clear.
I particularly want theMinister to respond to amendment No. 70. It would guarantee that avoluntary exchange of common land or a village green would be subjectto the same test as compulsorily purchased land. Section 19(1)(a) ofthe Acquisition of Land Act 1981 requires that land given in exchangemust be no less in area than the other land and must be “equallyadvantageous” to anypersons
“entitled torights of common or other rights, and to thepublic,”
who now have aright to walk on all commons under the Countryside and Rights of WayAct 2000.
Theamendment would ensure that what is received is no worse than what isgiven, provide a clear yardstick for exchanges as well as compulsorypurchase and obtain a subsequent guarantee from the Minister that itwould apply to the de-registration, exchange and registration of landtaking the place of the land being lost. It is very clear, and I knowthat the Minister will be dying to accept theamendments.