Access to the Countryside (Northern Ireland) Order 1983 (Hansard, 21 November 1983)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Energy (The Earl of Avon)
My Lords, I beg to move this order in the name of the my noble friend Lord Mansfield.

§ Lord Fitt
My Lords, in the absence of the noble Earl, Lord Mansfield, I take this opportunity to make a few remarks on the order. I had hoped that, on the occasion of my maiden intervention in the House, I should have been able to exude some confidence or express some hope for Northern Ireland in the future. However, the events of yesterday afternoon in County Armagh have determined otherwise. The happenings yesterday afternoon in a little church not far from the border in Northern Ireland will, I believe, have shocked and appalled every Member of this House. I myself, who have spent my lifetime in Northern Ireland, cannot yet fully understand what was the motivation of those who carried out such a brutal and callous murder of innocent people in a place of worship.
I had hoped last week that this order could have been moved and debated in a non-controversial manner. It deals with access to the countryside. Northern Ireland has a beautiful countryside, but the actions of those men yesterday have desecrated and defiled the very soil of the island of Ireland both North and South and have brought nothing but shame and degradation to the name of Ireland. I know that I shall have the support of the whole House in expressing my sympathy to the relatives of those who were so cruelly cut adrift from their loved ones in Northern Ireland.
I remember most vividly my maiden intervention in another place in 1966. Again, it was to highlight the awful state of society as it then was in Northern Ireland. Sadly, every day and every year has only led to an exacerbation of the awful situation as it then was. The events of yesterday, I believe were deliberately calculated to provoke a religious civil war in Northern Ireland. I believe that that was the deliberate and calculated intention. I can only make an appeal to those who are the target of that provocation not to fall into the trap that has been set for them.
14 The order contains 56 articles and five schedules. It seems a very heavy order if it was designed solely to create legislation to allow people to pass along public highways in Northern Ireland. I am ever mindful of any, or all, of the powers that are at present used and that may be given to district councils in Northern Ireland. There is nothing that is not controversial, or that cannot be made controversial, in relation to district authorities in Northern Ireland.
I wonder whether the Minister has undertaken the required consultation with the district authorities. Has he sought and been given ideas, or been made aware of the attitudes of the various spokesmen within the Northern Ireland Assembly? As my noble friend, Lord Donaldson, who is here this afternoon, will be aware, however much we may deliberate in this House or in another place, the real place to discuss these issues as they affect people in Northern Ireland is in a political assembly in the city of Belfast which would take in the representative views of the whole community in Northern Ireland. I have repeatedly said throughout my life as a political representative that another place, and indeed this House, cannot be fully aware in exactly the same way as people elected to a local assembly where local political structures are created of all the issues as they relate to Northern Ireland.
Therefore, on looking at the 56 articles, I personally, having been a city representative, cannot see anything dreadfully controversial, but it may be that some of the rural Members from Northern Ireland will see something in this proposed legislation which I do not see. I would only ask the Minister when he is replying to tell us whether he has had the consultations which are so necessary with the local authorities and with the representatives of the Assembly.
I have risen to my feet this afternoon to speak on this Bill, but my real intention is to put on the record of this House the appalling tragedy which befell the people in Armagh last night and to emphasise the need for us, everyone in this House, to say to those who were responsible that, however devilish their deeds may be, they will not succeed in attaining their political aims.

§ Lord Underhill
My Lords, I am certain that the whole House will have been pleased to hear the maiden speech of my noble friend Lord Fitt and will be pleased that he is with us in this House. I am certain that he will bring to the House added sincerity and conviction on the issues of Northern Ireland. I am sure that the whole House will pay tribute to his courage and to his conviction. Knowing his views on political and social matters I feel certain that the House will wish to hear my noble friend not only on Northern Ireland issues but on other matters as well. We thank him for his contribution this afternoon.
The order before us deals with very important matters; namely, the protection and maintenance of public rights of way and the public access to the countryside. As my noble friend Lord Fitt has said, the order comprises some 56 articles and four schedules. It is equivalent to a Bill, but because of the way in which we have to deal with legislation affecting Northern Ireland it cannot be amended. I note that the draft was considered by the Environment Committee of the 15 Assembly and that a detailed report was presented to that body. As no amendments are possible there is no point in going into detail, but there are a number of questions and matters which I would like to raise with the Minister. I am only sorry that I was unable to give him prior notice of these matters, but some of my reading of the Assembly's report was only completed over the weekend.
Article 2 draws no distinction between footpaths for walkers only and bridle ways which are to be used by both walkers and horse riders. In fact, the definition of "public path" would appear to cover walkers, horse riders and cyclists. There is also reference to it in Article 20, and it would appear to me that there is not sufficient definition. Under Article 3(1) a district council is charged with the compilation and preservation of maps and records of public rights of way. I should like to ask the Minister: what is the situation if a council fails to act? What is the standing of these maps and records? Do they have a definitive and legal standing? They are the same type of provisions as in Part III of the Wildlife and Countryside Act. Nowhere is there any reference to the scale of the maps or to how the public rights of way shall be marked upon them. Nor is there any reference to these maps and records being available for public inspection. What is the position regarding existing rights of way and public footpaths? Will a current register be sufficient? Will that have legal backing or has there to be a separate notice and decision on each path and public right of way?
Under Article 7 there is no duty upon the district councils to enforce the provisions with regard to ploughing. County councils in England and Wales have to carry out certain enforcement duties. Article 12 deals with the compulsory powers for the creation of public paths. Should there be public pressure for a public path, but a district council considers otherwise, are there provisions for any persons to appeal, may be to the department? I cannot see any reference to this in Schedule 1.
As regards Article 19, do the provisions of Schedule 1 apply to the temporary closures and diversions? If not, what safeguards will there be? Article 21 deals with long distance paths. Is the Minister able to give any indication as to the type of bodies which may be consulted as provided for in paragraph (4)? Will guidance be given to district councils on the type of bodies that should be consulted? In those cases where a long distance path may traverse more than one district council, how will the co-ordination be arranged? Will appropriate bodies be consulted before decisions are taken?
It was clear from the evidence presented to the Environment Committee of the Assembly that there are questions being raised in Northern Ireland about the Ulster Way which I understand passes through 21 of the 26 district councils. Why is the Ulster Way Committee not to be retained? If that body is not to be retained, why is there not another suitable body for that purpose? That point is made very strongly in paragraph 8 on page 8 of the Assembly's report. It is also advocated by the Sports Council of Northern Ireland, the National Trust and the Society for the Preservation of the Countryside.
16 I come to Part III dealing with access to open country. I see that Article 27 provides that: A district council shall consult the Department and such bodies … representatives of owners and occupiers". Is there provision for bodies representative of the public to be consulted? If not, why not? I note that the Sports Council of Northern Ireland states that it is a fact that the public in Northern Ireland generally believe that access to the mountains, moorlands and coastline is theirs as of right. In fact, many of us believe that that is the case in Great Britain as well. It is also observed that it is possible for an individual to gain legal access to open country, but after traversing a few miles he may find that legal access is no longer open to him. Is that not a matter for a central body to deal with?
I note that under Schedule 1 there is reference to prescribed bodies. Your Lordships will find the reference in paragraph 3(b)(iii). Will the Government list precisely who those prescribed bodies are? Finally, is there not a sound case for the creation of a body somewhat similar to the Countryside Commission to deal with all relevant matters under this order? Despite the efficiency of "the Department"—which is referred to throughout but which I presume is another way of describing the Ministers concerned—it is not sufficient to leave these matters to the Department, and the establishment of such a commission is recommended by the Assembly on page 10 of its report. I have raised just some of the issues which seem to me to be apparent. If we were able to amend the order like a Bill, there would be many other matters.

§ Lord Donaldson of Kingsbridge
My Lords, I must confess my feeling of admiration for the homework which has been done by the noble Lord, Lord Underhill. I looked at the order fairly carefully and I could not find a single question to ask. However, I suppose that that is the difference between industry and idleness. I did take the trouble to ring up the Northern Ireland Office and was assured that this order was simply bringing Northern Ireland into line with our arrangements here.
Although I do not have much to say about this order, I have quite a lot to say about the most important part of it; namely, the maiden speech of my old friend and colleague the noble Lord, Lord Fitt, and his appearance here, at which we all, in all parts of the House, rejoice. I think that he was the Member of Parliament for Belfast Dock in the 1972 Stormont Government. We then had the executive, which lasted for five months on a power-sharing basis and was finally wrecked because one section of the Protestant extremists had failed to join. The best organised men of violence on the Protestant side broke it. During that time the noble Lord, Lord Fitt, was a colleague of mine; I was the Minister in the Government and I think that he was Deputy Chief Executive of that Government. He was respected by all—certainly by the Protestants and certainly in those days by the SDLP. It was only later that they turned against him, and they turned against him because he was right and they were wrong. If they had been able to do what he would have done and what he favoured doing—which was to come into the Assembly at once and share the 17 power that was being offered—we would have a very much more hopeful situation than we have now.
He was a pleasure to work with. He used to enter the Secretary of State's office, sit down, take his gun out of his pocket—of course, he was not allowed a gun in the Secretary of State's office, although he was allowed one in his pocket—and the flow of language of all kinds was fascinating but always extremely well-informed and extremely shrewd. It is a tragedy that his colleagues in the SDLP have rejected the best man they ever had.
I shall say no more, except to point out that in his remarks he gave us something very disagreeable to think about concerning what we have to discuss in the Statement which is to be made later this afternoon. I shall say no more about that until then. However, I should like to conclude by saying that I welcome this order, but even more I welcome the presence of the noble Lord, Lord Fitt, in our House.

§ Viscount Brookeborough
My Lords, like other noble Lords, I should like to rise and congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Fitt, on his appearance in this House and on his speech. I agree with what the noble Lord, Lord Donaldson, said about how much he will contribute on many matters to this House. The noble Lord, Lord Fitt, and I have known each other for a very long time and I think that we have a mutual respect. It is a great pleasure to follow him, and his maiden speech today was certainly the trigger which prompted me to speak on this particular order, because this draft measure has been very fully discussed with many people. It has not satisfied everybody, and I personally have one or two reservations.
The noble Lord, Lord Underhill, mentioned horses. I believe that the order empowers local councils to allow trekkers on horseback and people like that to use these footpaths, but it is to be at the discretion of the local council and there could be some disagreement on that. For my sins, I am the national representative of the British Horse Society in Northern Ireland and we have made representations on this point.
On a much wider issue, if the Minister can assure us that the Department of Agriculture will have a very large say in the consultations that will take place before a footpath is designated, I believe that the fear of the farmers will in fact be satisfied. As I have said before, the Department of Agriculture has a very special relationship with the industry, whether it is the manufacturing industry attached to agriculture or the agricultural industry itself. The farmers of Ulster have great confidence in the department. I should like an assurance from my noble friend that he is satisfied that in fact his department will have a large say. I, therefore, recommend this order.