§ Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domerasked Her Majesty's Government:
What assessment has been made of the risk to non-motorised users from using the C602/A 1065 and C603 roads as the respective alternatives to those public rights of way which have been suspended on safety grounds at RAF Lakenheath and RAF Mildenhall; and [HL4224]
What assessment of the likely danger to the safety of lawful users of footpath 6 Eriswell, adjacent to RAF Lakenheath, was made prior to the imposition of Traffic Regulation Orders under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 in (a) 2001, (b) 2002 and (c) 2003. [HL4225]
§ Lord BachThe temporary closures of the footpaths/ public rights of way at RAFs Mildenhall and Lakenheath were affected by Suffolk County Council. on the advice of the Ministry of Defence, which took all relevant factors into consideration, in particular the safety of members of the public using the original rights of way, as required by the Road Traffic Act 1984. There is, however, no statutory requirement to take into account any risk in using alternative routes when considering the temporary closure of a right of way.
47WA
§ Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domerasked Her Majesty's Government:
What was the cost of complying with Section XVII of the Defence Act 1842 when the footpath at RAF Lakenheath was closed in 1999. [HL4226]
§ Lord BachThe cost of complying with section XVII of the Defence Act 1842 when the footpath at RAF Lakenheath was closed and diverted in 1999 was approximately £30,000.
§ Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domerasked Her Majesty's Government:
What representations have been received since 1997 from the United States Air Force or Department of Defence regarding the use of the Defence Act 1842 to close footpath 6 Eriswell, adjacent to RAF Lakenheath; and [HL4227]
Whether there is any current intention to use the powers contained in the Defence Act 1842 with regard to footpaths and bridleways; and [HL4228]
Whether in any cases where the intention is to use the powers contained in the Defence Act 1842, it is also intended that the obligation under Section XVII of that Act to create a new footpath or bridleway as a reasonably convenient replacement and alternative to the closed routes will be complied with. [HL4229]
§ Lord BachThe United States Visiting Force has raised security concerns surrounding the use of Eriswell footpath number six, adjacent to RAF Lakenheath. It is possible that my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Defence will exercise his powers under section 16 of the Defence Act 1842 to permanently close the footpath, but in such circumstances a new footpath would be created. There are no other cases at present where the use of Section 16 of the Defence Act 1842 is being considered to effect closure of footpath or bridleway.