HL Deb 15 November 2004 vol 666 cc109-10WA
Lord Astor of Hever

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 1 November (WA 7), whether the figures relating to landowners include tenant farmers, or whether this is an additional figure. [HL4808]

Lord Bach

We do not differentiate between landowners and tenant farmers in the context of training on private land. The figures provided in my previous Answer therefore include tenant farmers.

Lord Astor of Hever

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 1 November (WA 7), when is the predicted timescale for the impact of the loss of opportunities for military training on private land to be decided. [HL4809]

Lord Bach

The impact of landowners' and farmers' withdrawal of permission to train on private land can only be fully assessed when the scale of such decisions is known. This is, of course, entirely a matter for individual landowners and farmers. In the mean time, we remain extremely grateful for the assistance landowners and farmers give to allow the Army the opportunity to train on private land.

Lord Astor of Hever

asked Her Majesty's Government:

What proportion of Ministry of Defence land would be rendered unusable without (a) contiguous private land being available; and (b) access rights across private land. [HL4813]

Lord Bach

No Ministry of Defence training land would be rendered completely unusable.