Clause 13.—(ACCESS AGREEMENTS.) (Hansard, 4 July 1967)

§ Dr. Dickson Mabon
I beg to move, Amendment No. 20, in page 12, line 1, at the beginning to insert Subject to the provisions of subsection (8) below,".

§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
It would be convenient to discuss Amendment No. 21 at the same time.

§ Dr. Mabon
This is a paving Amendment, for Amendment No. 21. The Crofters Commission has suggested the substance of these two Amendments. Those who are acquainted with the work of the Crofters Commission know that certain common grazings have more than 50 shareholders, and negotiations with each individual crofter could prove difficult and lengthy. The benefit of treating with one body is obvious, and fortunately the common grazings committee is available.
At the same time, we must provide adequate safeguards for the rights of the individual crofters, and this we have done by making the consent of the majority of the crofters ordinarily resident in a township a prerequisite for the exercise by the Common Grazings Committee of the power to enter into an access agreement.
We have a precedent in Section 25 of the Crofters (Scotland) Act, 1955, which makes the same consent necessary for the exercise by a common grazing committee of its power to carry out works for the improvement of common grazings or the fixed equipment required in connection with them. Since we are all not equally familiar with crofting legislation, to put it modestly, I should say that a common grazings committee is normally appointed by the crofters concerned, although if they fail to do so, the Crofters Commission has the power to appoint. As well as having the duty of carrying out improvement works, to which I have referred, grazings committees are required to maintain the grazings and related equipment and to make and administer regulations for the management and use of common grazings. I am glad that the Crofters Commission has given a warm welcome to this Bill, describing it as: A forward looking Measure which can confer great benefits on both city dwellers and rural dwellers. It has come forward to add constructively the suggestions for improving the Bill 1612 and the Government have readily accepted them. I put them forward for the House's consideration and commend them to every hon. Member.

§ Mr. Stodart
The Minister of State is taking a very great risk, a surprising risk, after one all-night sitting, in introducing a Measure about crofting. Perhaps it is in the knowledge that the hon. Member for the Western Isles (Mr. Malcolm MacMillan) is not present, because I seem to remember speeches of a considerable length on the subject of crofting, during the very early hours of the morning. I should like to ask the hon. Gentleman two questions. On the face of it, from the Amendment, every crofter in a township can have a say in making the agreements which have to do only with those who have a share in the common grazings—the people Who are ordinarily resident. That was at one time people who live within two miles of the crofts, and was subsequently changed, in the 1966 Act, to within 10 miles of the crofts.
Do all crofters in a township have a share in the grazings? I should have thought not, but I do not profess to be highly versed in crofting legislation. Section 24 of the 1955 Act starts: The crofters who share in a common grazing may … and then it goes on to say that they shall appoint a grazings committee. That would imply that there are crofters who do not share in the common grazings. If I am right, I am not clear why those who are ordinarily resident and therefore live possibly 10 miles away from their croft, who do not share in the grazings, have any say in this matter, because in the Clause they are certainly brought in.
My second point is one of information. Presumably the payment in consideration of making the agreement means either a rent for the access, payable regularly, or a capital sum. It is to be paid to the grazing committee by the local planning authority and the committee has either to divide it among the crofters who share in the grazings or, again if the majority of these ordinary resident crofters agree, as well as the Commission, the committee can spend it on the grazings, or on the fences which have to do with it. Is the decision as to which of these alternatives is to be used, to be left to the grazings committee? This is not entirely clear in 1613 the Clause. On the other hand, can the local planning authority express a view and would the committee have to follow that view? Could the local planning authority say that it wanted the committee to use the money in a particular way, or is that a matter solely for the grazings committee?
On what basis is the proportion of the crofters rights determined for distribution? This is referred to, this share-out in the Clause. Is it on the acreage that a person has, or on the number of beasts he owns? Is the person who is farming his croft well, and carrying more beasts to the acre, to get more from the share-out than others?

§ Dr. Dickson Mabon
We are following the precedent set out in Section 25. The hon. Gentleman is right in that this implies, and it is true, that not necessarily all crofters share in the common grazings. The decision as to how any proceeds, if I may call them that, consequent upon an access agreement, should be shared out, on a revenue or capital basis, is a matter for the common grazings committee.
All its procedures and decisions are to some extent governed by the Crofters Commission, so that if any croft shareholder, or person who is not directly a shareholder, thinks that he has a consequential interest in this, he can raise the matter with the Crofters Commission. The share-out would be determined by the number of shareholders of the respective agreements that there are within the particular and peculiar circumstances of the township.
Far be it from me to go into a lengthy argument about this and to praise the previous administration for any of their work, but in all fairness I must confess that the 1955 Crofters Act was a good Act, and Section 25 seems to be an eminently sensible one, which has worked well. It is reasonable that we should follow that precedent in this regard and I would commend this to the House.

§ Mr. Willis
Can my hon. Friend help me on a point which has interested me? I understand that the Forestry Commission has just made a similar arrangement with crofting township grazing committees, to acquire land, and the money that is paid is used for the benefit of the 1614 grazing that is left. As far as I know, that does not require any legislation. Why can an arrangement of this kind be made in the case of the Forestry Commission without legislation, and yet legislation is necessary where the Countryside Commission requires land for access?

§ Dr. Dickson Mabon
Without notice I cannot give a reference to the powers, either in the Crofters Act or in the Forestry Commission Act governing this, but I am assured that we certainly could not proceed under the Crofters Acts alone in this regard. We would have to make a specific provision in this Bill if we wanted to let local planning authorities, or the Commission come to an agreement with the common grazings committee in this way. I am sorry that I cannot be more specific. My right hon. Friend has made a very good point on the other matter, and if he does not mind I will look into this and let him have a note as to what Statute the Forestry Commission have proceeded under in this regard.