POWERS EXERCISABLE OVER OR NEAR COMMON LAND. (Hansard, 9 April 1968)

§ Mr. MacDermot
I beg to move Amendment No. 25, in page 9, line 19, after "section" insert: and Schedule (procedure for taking common land) to this Act".

§ Mr. Speaker
I suggest that with this Amendment we should take Amendment No. 78, and Amendment No. 82, the New Schedule.

§ Mr. MacDermot
This involves the new Schedule. These Amendments are of some importance and I should explain them to the House.
The purpose and effect of the Amendments is to introduce a power of compulsory acquisition in relation to land other than common land which is in the neighbourhood of common land to which the Clause applies. Secondly, it simplifies and shortens the procedure for obtaining Ministerial authority for taking land out of a common while still preserving all the present safeguards and facilities for making objections. Thirdly, it is to make clear that the power to acquire commonable and other rights in or over common land does not apply to rights vested in statutory undertakers for the purposes of their undertakings.
1.30 a.m.
By subsection (2), local authorities can exercise their Clause 7 powers on other land in the neighbourhood of the common to enable better use to be made 1279 of the common for open-air recreation. This power will sometimes be required where it is impracticable to provide the public facilities on the common land itself. An instance might be vehicular access which constituted a serious road hazard or a car park which might be objectionable on the common or on other planning grounds.
Subsection (2), coupled with their existing powers of acquisition, will enable local authorities to acquire this land by agreement but it may occasionally be necessary for them to purchase such land against the wishes of the owner, so that the existing rights of public access over the neighbouring common may be used to better advantage. We hope that such instances will be rare and the local authority will be allowed to exercise compulsory powers over neighbouring land only if it were shown to be impracticable to put the public facilities on the common itself.
On that understanding, we think it appropriate to give local authorities the necessary powers of compulsion; this is consistent with the other acquisition of land powers over parts of common land to which there are public rights of access.
My hon. Friend the Member for South Shields (Mr. Blenkinsop) mentioned the procedure. The present procedure is complicated and may lead to unnecessary duplication, for instance of public inquiries. This is an attempt to streamline the procedure while ensuring proper safeguards for the individual and rights of objection. Paragraph 2(1) of the new Schedule provides for the local authority to publicise its proposals locally before applying for the Minister's authority. Thus, the Minister will be enabled to take all representations into account before determining the applications. This avoids the drawback of the present procedure, under which he must make a preliminary judgment of the application without the benefit of knowing local reaction.
The discretion to hold a local public inquiry is retained; there is a precedent for this in Section 194 of the Law of Property Act, 1925, and Section 22 of the Commons Act, 1899. Second, where a local authority invokes the compulsory powers to acquire part of a common or 1280 rights over a common, the Amendments would allow the necessary acquisition procedure to run side by side with the procedure for obtaining the Minister's authority under Clause 7. This will involve a combined public notice inviting representations and then, if the Minister decides to hold an inquiry, it can be a single joint inquiry dealing with both the Clause 7 authority and the confirmation of the compulsory purchase order.
These Amendments do not disturb the present need for the Minister, before giving his authority, to be satisfied either that suitable land has been, or will be, given in exchange, or that exchange land is unnecessary; but it removes the need for him to give a preliminary certificate that he is so satisfied.
A local authority will now be required, by subsection (2) of the new Schedule, to serve a copy of its proposals on the parish council or the chairman at the parish council meeting. This meets an Opposition Amendment which was tabled in Committee and which was accepted in principle by the Government. A protection for statutory undertakers appears in paragraph (6) of the new Schedule, and this is intended to remove a possible doubt of construction. This matter was raised in an Opposition Amendment in Committee and we undertook to consider it.

§ Mr. Gibson-Watt
The hon. and learned Gentleman went in some detail into the Clause and the powers which it gives. We have grave doubts about these powers, although we accept his assurance that only rarely will they be used.
In Committee we argued the whole question of exchange land and whether, in the opinion of the Minister, it would be necessary to replace common land which was taken for a country park. The fact that the present law—I do not blame the present Government for this, any more than former Governments—applying to common land is still in the air and is likely to remain there for a considerable time to come obviously causes some difficulty in this respect.
I note what the hon. and learned Gentleman says about proper warning being given, the need to publish notices and the proper inquiry procedure being 1281 adopted. I also note his remarks about parish councils being warned. As I have said before, my hon. Friends and I do not like the idea of compulsory purchase. No doubt we will have to accept the Minister's assurance that these powers will only occasionally be used. Nevertheless, we have grave doubts about this whole procedure.

§ Dame Joan Vickers
In Committee I asked if local authorities must consult commoners before erecting anything on their land. On that occasion the Parliamentary Secretary said that he did not think that there was a statutory requirement to consult commoners. He said that he would consider whether or not provision for this should be made and that he would look into the general principle. He thought that normally the authorities would consult, and he promised to seek further advice. Has further advice been taken, and, if so, what is the result?

§ Mr. MacDermot
I should be in a position to answer that question. I am not. I apologise to the hon. Lady and I will write to her about it.