§ Mr. Fauldsasked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he intends to bring before Parliament the proposed amendments to the Ancient Monuments Acts, outlined in his consultative document of April 1977.
§ Mr. ShoreWork is in hand on provisions to amend and consolidate the Ancient Monuments Acts. A Bill will be introduced at the earliest opportunity.
§ Mr. Fauldsasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will seek to place the responsibility for paying any compensation due for land damaged as a result of the exercise of rights of entry by the competent body, as mentioned in paragraph 37 of his consultative document of April 1977, on whichever authority has designated the body as competent.
§ Mr. ShoreNo. Exercise of the rights of entry, including the right to excavate, would be at the initiative of the competent body. Any compensation payable 279W would be a matter for them as part of the total cost of archaeological investigation.
§ Mr. Fauldsasked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will seek to enable interested third parties to be represented at inquiries over scheduled monument consent as mentioned in paragraph 10 of his consultative document of April 1977.
§ Mr. ShoreThe proposals in the consultative document provide that representation of a third party with no legal interest in the site would be subject to the discretion of the inspector holding the inquiry.
§ Mr. Fauldsasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will seek to enable local authorities to schedule areas as of archaeological importance with his approval as mentioned in paragraph 53 of his consultative document of April 1977.
§ Mr. ShoreParagraph 27 of the consultative document proposes that local authorities—both county and district councils—would be given such powers but that designations by them would not take effect until confirmed by me.
§ Mr. Fauldsasked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether nationalised industries and other public bodies will be subject to the same constraints as private undertakings within the proposed areas of archaeological importance.
§ Mr. ShoreIt is not proposed to distinguish between nationalised industries, public bodies and private undertakings in this matter.
§ Mr. Fauldsasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will extend the maximum period available for archaeological investigation to nine months as mentioned in paragraph 35 of his consultative document of April 1977.
§ Mr. ShoreIt is hoped that a satisfactory opportunity for archaeological excavation will generally be secured by negotiation. Where, however, the use of statutory powers is necessary, a maximum period of six months as proposed in paragraph 35 seems to me to strike280W the right balance between the interests of archaeologists and developers.
§ Mr. Fauldsasked the Secretary of State for the Environment when he will make public the criteria by which areas will be designated as of archaeological importance.
§ Mr. ShoreDesignation would be selective. Areas of high archaeological potential would be considered if there were a threat of destruction of buried evidence by development or redevelopment and there were evidence of need to invoke statutory powers in order to secure appropriate opportunities for investigation.
§ Mr. Fauldsasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will support the principle that the developer of land should be obliged to contribute towards the necessary archaeological excavations.
§ Mr. ShoreI am not persuaded that this would be right. I hope, however, that the practice by some developers of making voluntary contributions will be followed by many others.