Caroline Lucas's Bill to extend CROW access - my attempt to lobby her

[al]

Because England isn’t Scotland. Especially southern England is heavily populated.

Well, they could easily have pointed out that the Glasgow-Edinburgh belt is heavily populated, and used that as an excuse - fortunately for Scotland they didn't.

 

[mikem]

Scotland has 60% of England's land area, but only 8% of it's population...

 

[Fjell]

Well, they could easily have pointed out that the Glasgow-Edinburgh belt is heavily populated, and used that as an excuse - fortunately for Scotland they didn't.

When I lived in Scotland in the 70’s and 80’s I went wherever I pleased. I didn’t think they’d actually shoot you.

One of the most noticeable things about OS maps anywhere in Scotland is the lack of paths, no matter where you look. They had a way worse problem than England, and I very much doubt people are going anywhere new on farmland anyway as there are no paths. I can walk from my house in the Dales across the fields on a very dense network - that just doesn’t exist in Scotland, even in very similar areas in the central belt. You also still see people trying to discourage people from using tracks and gates in Scotland, some pretty obvious ones in Jura last time I was there.

 

[PeteHall]

I would start with “greenbelt”. What is that? It’s a planning definition not a geographical one. There is literally no difference between countryside inside or outside. In fact much of the best recreational land is outside it. It makes not the slightest sense. Many have argued that in fact we should be building on the greenbelt in preference to outside it, particularly around London where much of it is very nondescript.

Fair point regarding "greenbelt". This is a "greenbelt" site that we currently have in planning. The proposed development will be a vast improvement over the current use, but certain stakeholders are obliged to object because it is "greenbelt". Another similar site about 100 yards the other side of the motorway is also in planning for a similar proposed use, but is not classified as "greenbelt" so hasn't got the objection. The classification is meaningless at best.

 

[Fjell]

The population of England has gone from 50 to 60 million in a couple of decades, almost all of the increase in the south. Most of the issues we have today are the result of the Army of Nim refusing to accept that has consequences that need addressing. Millions of houses need to be built in the south, new towns and even cities need to be established. There is no other option. And the place to start is def the greenbelt around London where people want to live most.

 

[pwhole]

I did a job on a church in Oxfordshire a few years ago, about 30 mins drive from the motorway - our journey to the church from the junction went through entirely empty rolling fields for the duration of the trip. The only thing we noticed that was unusual were regular posters by the roadside for the local Conservative MP saying: 'Stop the proposed housing development!', with details below on how to contact this chap to do just that. When we arrived at the church at 9.30 we were met by the warden, who gave us the key and left. For the rest of the day, the only human we saw (from the roof) was a lady on a horse who trotted past at lunchtime and waved. We left at 5, and put the key under the mat as the warden said he was still at mega-Sainsbury, but it would be OK as there's 'no-one around' (his words). Certainly no-one used the church, but the repairs included gold leaf for the clock. The view from the top was picture-postcard perfect, but I remember telling my colleague that I wished a complete town could be lowered from the sky like the UFO in Close Encounters.

Our return trip to the motorway was punctuated by endless detours to try and find a 'shop' in one of these godforsaken thatched villages, but there were none whatsoever, apart from a Post Office that was closed. We ended up at mega-Sainsbury, predictably, where a thousand large cars were parked, all the owners doing their mega-shop.

Until we start taking this lot on and ploughing up their pointless postcard fantasy-land, this will just get worse.

 

[Badlad]

The basic premise of the Caroline Lucas bill is to extend public access, both in terms of the land types this can take place in and the type of activities allowed. Pretty much all the arguments made against this have been made a hundred times before. Before the National Parks Act in 1949, before the CRoW Act in 2000, and very few of the fears expressed at the time became much of a problem. On balance the benefit to the people far, far outweighs the few problems which have been caused and there are many formal mechanisms in place to tackle those few problems that do exist.

 

[Fjell]

Yeah, but they all feed on it. The Lib-Dems number one campaign thing in the south is around preventing house construction because

The basic premise of the Caroline Lucas bill is to extend public access, both in terms of the land types this can take place in and the type of activities allowed. Pretty much all the arguments made against this have been made a hundred times before. Before the National Parks Act in 1949, before the CRoW Act in 2000, and very few of the fears expressed at the time became much of a problem. On balance the benefit to the people far, far outweighs the few problems which have been caused and there are many formal mechanisms in place to tackle those few problems that do exist.

There is a cabal of various political parties that are trying to buy votes by pandering to Nimbyism. The Greens and Libdems are def in that group and are trying to out-Nimby the Tories in the shires to buy votes. You are left wondering who will do the right thing. The Tories just chucked in their house building targets again under pressure from MP’s.

Upland areas don’t have anything like the problems that arise when land is being properly farmed (which isn’t most of the Dales even in the valleys). What is going to happen when crops are being worked (sprayed for example) and people have a legal right to roam around with their dogs and kids? Farms are industrial enterprises. It only works on land that has been set aside for whatever reason or is simple pasture. There is a need for some better access to rivers.

 

[MarkS]

What is going to happen when crops are being worked (sprayed for example) and people have a legal right to roam around with their dogs and kids? Farms are industrial enterprises.It only works on land that has been set aside for whatever reason or is simple pas ture.

My understanding is that arable land isn't part of the bill amendment: there is not (and is not proposed to be) access to improved land.

It only works on land that has been set aside for whatever reason or is simple pasture.

I think this is exactly what is being covered.

Maybe someone more informed can clarify though?

 

[Fjell]

Given most set aside is going to get public funding, I think this is a matter of making it contractual. The ELM thing. I think if you want better cave access this the is route. What does the public get for it’s money?

A typical example of the river problem is the Lune around Kirkby Lonsdale. There is no footpath alongside the river for many miles. There is also ongoing conflict between fishermen and canoeists, and the latter struggle to get on the river without tramping long distances across agricultural fields (they have to use the very few bridges). It is going to be tricky to resolve.

 

[RestingCaver]

I wrote to Caroline Lucas in early October and she was quietly supportive. I suggested the amendment (see below) and she confirmed to me that "should the Bill progress beyond second reading, then I would be very happy to look at the issue again."

Thats encouraging since that's when the Bill could be amended. The second reading is on 24 March.

If a few Cavers were to write to their MP's to raise the profile of Caroline's Bill and to highlight the caving issue that could help.

Here's my suggested wording. Simple and to the point.

"3. Right to camp on Access Land and the right to enter in to caves in Access Land.
(1) Any person may camp on or cave in Access Land, provided that they comply with codes of conduct"

Cheers
Tim

The Bill is scheduled for a sitting on 1 December 2023 ( see: https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3221/stages/16637). Yep, 8 months time. I'll keep an eye on progress and report back. Cheers All. Tim