PLANTING OF TREES, SHRUBS AND GRASS OR OTHER PLANTS BY ROADS AUTHORITY (Hansard, 20 June 1984)

§ Mr. Craigen
Will the Minister comment on the matter of maintaining the trees and shrubbery once they have been planted?

§ Mr. Maxton
Subsection (2) says: No such tree, shrub, grass, other plant, guard or fence shall be planted (or as the case may be erected) or allowed to remain in such a situation as to hinder the reasonable use of the road". 378 Does this conflict with legislation on the protection of trees and on planning? I know that some trees have been deliberately left because special permission would be needed to cut them down. They cause a small obstruction of vision for a driver approaching a major road from a minor road. It is difficult for such a driver to see what is on the main road because of the tree. Does this clause mean that the tree would have to be cut down in that case?

§ Mr. Home Robertson
I declare an interest in that I am a farmer who has some land, on which there are trees growing, that adjoins roads. I take this opportunity to seek some clarification from the Minister.
It would be a pity if this clause were to lead to the wholesale clearance of roadside trees throughout Scotland. Farmers in general, and other people in the countryside, get a lot of criticism for cutting down trees, pulling up hedges and denuding the countryside generally. In many areas, the only trees that are left are those by roads and hedges. If, as a consequence of clause 48, roads authorities were to start requiring landowners, farmers, tenants and anybody else to remove trees and shrubs because they are too near the road, Scotland would be a poorer and less attractive place.
There is a potential conflict between two pieces of legislation—this legislation and planning legislation on tree preservation. I have experienced this problem. I have had a roads authority tell me that a tree will have to be cut or its branches will have to be lopped off because they are too near to the road. When I have noised it abroad that this work was about to be undertaken, the local planning authority has said, "Oh no, you don't." I am told that I need a felling licence to fell the tree, or a tree preservation order is put on it. Which piece of legislation will take precedence? Clause 48 tells us that we must fell trees near roads, yet there is what is perhaps more legitimate legislation on planning and protection of the countryside, which provides that trees should be left in place. The Minister cannot have it both ways.

§ Mr. Allan Stewart
The simple answer to the questions that have been raised is that the clause applies only to new trees, trees which will be planted. It does not apply to existing trees.

§ Mr. Home Robertson
Some trees reach maturity and have to be felled and others are blown down by gales, for example. Frequently people are put under pressure by planning authorities to replace such trees by replanting young trees. If someone has been responsible for roadside trees and wants to replace an existing tree, will he have to go to the roads authority or the Scottish Development Department to get permission to plant a tree?

§ Mr. Allan Stewart
The hon. Gentleman is raising an issue that is more appropriate to clause 89, to which we shall come in due course. Clause 48 simply enables a roads authority to plant trees and shrubs within, or partly within, a public road boundary and to take protective measures. The hon. Member for Glasgow, Maryhill (Mr. Craigen) asked me about the maintenance of such trees. It would be a responsibility of the roads authority to maintain the trees that it planted.