§ 7.8 p.m.
§ Lord ReayMy Lords, on behalf of my noble friend I beg to move that the House do now resolve itself into Committee on this Bill.
§ Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.— (Lord Reay.)
§ On Question, Motion agreed to.
§ House in Committee accordingly.
§ [The PRINCIPAL DEPUTY CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES in the Chair.]
§ Clauses 1 to 3 agreed to.
§ Clause 4 [Exercise of powers in relation to Crown land in private occupation]:
§ Lord Reay moved the amendment:
§ Page 3, line 45, at end insert ("(whether it is an interest in land or arises under a licence).").
§ The noble Lord said: On behalf of my noble friend, I hope to explain this amendment quite briefly. The background is that where Crown land is occupied by the Crown— for example, by a government department— there is no need for an authorisation enabling inspectors to exercise rights of access, entry and unobstructed inspection in accordance with the inspection protocol of the CFE treaty to be given under Clause 2 of the Bill as the Government themselves can give permission to the inspection team to enter the land. When, however, Crown land is in private occupation an authorisation will be needed to ensure that the private occupier cannot refuse entry. Clause 4(1) makes it clear that when Crown land is privately occupied an authorisation may be issued.
§ Upon further consideration of the provision, the Government have decided that account needs to be taken of the fact that a person occupying Crown land may do so in two ways: first, by way of a lease (that is an interest in land; for example, a property right); and secondly, by way of a licence (that is a right granted by a contract). The words "private interest" might be construed to refer only to the first of those 73 possibilities; that is to say, an occupation as a result of a lease. To make clear beyond doubt that an authorisation may he issued and that rights of access and entry are guaranteed in respect of Crown land occupied as a result of a licence, this small, detailed amendment is required. I beg to move.
§ Lord RichardI am grateful to the Minister for explaining the matter so clearly. He read his brief with aplomb, but I still do not understand. Without going into great detail, it appears that if one occupies land by virtue of a private interest one does not need then to define that private interest, whether it is an interest in the land or arises under a licence. However, if the Government wish to define the issue, who am I to disagree?
Can the Minister confirm that if the amendment is passed it will have no tangible effects on the lease of a tenant holding Crown land which may become the subject of an inspection under the framework of the Act? In other words, can the Minister confirm that the provision will not affect the lease in the sense of there being a continuing legal interest but that it will merely give the authorisation powers in respect of inspection which the Bill sets out.
I understand that the United States should learn today whether the compromise formula that .it has proposed for solving the dispute about the reclassification of Russian tank divisions as coastal defence units which are outside the scope of the treaty is to be accepted by the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union's chief of staff is in Washington today. It would be helpful to know whether the compromise has been accepted because to a large extent that problem has held up further progress on this Bill. It has prevented further progress on other arms control provisions. What is the latest situation as regards that matter?
§ Lord ReayI am grateful to the noble Lord for raising; no objections of substance to the amendment. He asked whether it was necessary. I merely repeat that it is required in order to make clear beyond doubt that an authorisation applies in respect of both types of private occupation. I understand that the provision will have no effect on the particular lease about which he inquired.
With regard to the broader and political issue that he raised, contacts have been made between the allies and the Soviet Union. The United States has taken the lead for the allies and some progress has been made. However, the key problem of ground equipment in naval infantry units in particular remains unresolved.
We hope that the visit to Washington today of the Soviet Union's chief of staff will yield satisfactory results. However, we do not yet have any information about the result of the discussions.
§ On Question, amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 4, as amended, agreed to.
§ Remaining clauses and schedule agreed to.
§ House resumed: Bill reported with an amendment.