In light of other threads, posts and questions about CRoW today, the CRoW liaison officers report to Saturdays BCA Council meeting may answer several of the questions posed. I confess it is rather long and may not be everyone's bedtime reading but a few might be interested. It is worth noting that this report was accepted by Council with all for, none against and no abstentions.
CRoW Liason Officer Report to Council ? January 2016.
Actions from the 10th October Council meeting
1. Concerns had been raised by NAMHO over how CRoW may affect access to mines. I liaised with NAMHO and conducted some further research with the assistance of Council members and was able to send them a letter to put in front of their next meeting. It is hoped that the letter would alleviate some of the concerns mine enthusiasts held over CRoW.
2. I have continued my research into the value of caving to our rural economies with some progress. This is opportune as on 28th October, David Rutley, MP and Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Mountaineering managed to secure a Westminster Hall debate on the ?economic value of outdoor recreation?. This lobbying has benefited all outdoor interests and managed to get outdoor recreation firmly written into the new ?Strategy for Sport?. http://ukcaving.com/board/index.php?topic=19633.msg252332;topicseen#new This focusses more on the benefits of physical activity rather than just sport, where the well-being of participants is valued as much as sporting success. Amongst other factors the strategy will need to bring together government departments such as Health, Sport, Local Government and Environment. This is far too big an issue to be covered in this report but there are great opportunities here for caving, significantly the timing of the BCA access campaign over the next few years. As for the value of caving to our rural economies I have focussed on the northern caving region. Here, preliminary study of fact and estimate show a value between ?3-4million per year (excluding commercial businesses such as outdoor shops and show caves). Extrapolated across all caving regions it is easy to see that this would amount to ?10million per year and have a significant effect on the specific areas frequented by cavers.
3. I have also looked into offering advice to our Access Controlling Bodies on the Defra interpretation of CRoW. I liaised with the BCA administrator on timing so that the advice could be sent out with renewals. This did not leave me enough time especially as the idea has developed. Having spoken with our access group and members of the exec it has been suggested that this should be expanded to include advice on; section 26 restriction, bats, the BCA campaign, reassurances to landowners and their liability. I hope to work on this with colleagues in time for the next Council meeting although it has been suggested to issue the final guidance through C&A.
Ongoing Work
1. I have continued with my efforts to gather wide ranging support for BCA?s position on CRoW. This has involved contacting other outdoor affiliated bodies and lobbying MP?s and the authorities. In addition to the access campaign I have also used the opportunity to promote caving and encourage a more positive image of our sport. This has been welcomed and embraced by all who I have met.
2. As a caver local to the Yorkshire Dales I have, over the last few years, attended a number of meetings of both the Yorkshire Dales and Lancashire Local Access Forums (LAF) in order to boost the profile of caving in my area and to highlight various local access issues. The LAF is the statutory consulting body set up under the CRoW Act and comprises an equal mix of landowners, business interests and outdoor groups. It would be this body that government consults over any access issues so it is important to explain our case to these forums where possible. My attendance at the LAF and the issues I have raised have been warmly received and has led to the opportunity to take the issue to the wider national LAF. I now intend to follow this up in my role as BCA CRoW officer.
3. I have continued to liaise with other outdoor groups as indicated in my previous report. All have been supportive. I have had some conversations with David Rutley MP in his role as chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Mountaineering and with the BMC as the group?s secretary. This has all been very positive and has led to me being invited to attend a meeting with outdoor access specialists, which I shall attend in London next month. This contact also helped me to organise the VIP caving trip mentioned below.
4. I also met with my local MP, Julian Smith where we discussed promoting the value of caving to the local area, some local access issues and the wider BCA campaign. As a government whip Mr Smith cannot get involved in the campaign directly but has offered to write to the Secretary of State on our behalf. Council will remember that senior conservative MP, David Davis also wrote to the Secretary of State on our behalf. His advice as an experienced politician was to keep doing what we are doing, by gathering support and not going away. By chance a caving colleague, and supporter of the BCA campaign met the Secretary of State at a social event. He was able to brief her first hand on our campaign. This contact will hopefully stand us in good stead for the future. Mr Smith has since written to inform me that he heard very positive things from his parliamentary colleagues about the caving trip (below) and that where the opportunity arose in Westminster he would do all he could to promote caving.
5. With the help of colleagues I organised a VIP caving trip to Gaping Ghyll in the Yorkshire dales. The trip had two purposes, one to demonstrate the positive benefits of caving to both the participants and the local community, and the second to discuss the issues surrounding CRoW and caver access. Our VIP?s had a great day out and were very helpful and supportive of BCA. The press release explains the trip in more detail:
6. I have kept myself informed of the on-going access dispute at Drws Cefn/Ogof Draenen. Without wishing to make any comment on the dispute itself the situation has escalated to a point where the outcome may have wider implications and possible impact on the BCA. I am certainly no expert in law but my observations are as follows; The entrance to Drws Cefn is on access land as defined by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. As such and in view of other legislation such as the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 there are procedures which need to be followed by local authority and landowners. It is my understanding that any citizen or NGO may challenge the lawfulness of a decision or action made by a public body by the Judicial Review process and that is what seems to be happening here. There are strict time limits which affect Judicial Review and the solicitor?s letter referred to in this case may just be part of the pre-action protocol. The review takes place before a judge in the Administrative Court and is concerned only that the correct procedures have been followed rather than that the decision was correct. It is possible to apply to the court for a Cost Protection Order, but normally the loser bears all the costs. There is also the risk that the case may be won but the public body may make the same decision again so long as they do so in a lawful way. In my view a decision has yet to be made which can be challenged by Judicial Review. I suggest the BCA continue as it is whilst keeping an eye on any future developments.
7. At the beginning of December I participated in a WebEx online meeting with members of the BCA exec and access team. I brought everyone up to date with the campaign. The secretary may wish to report further on this meeting.
8. The following ?strap lines? have been suggested by various members which summarise the BCA campaign. They all state pretty much the same thing. Do Council agree with the summary?
We are ? Campaigning to change DEFRA's interpretation of the CRoW Act and its application to caving to reflect what we believe was Parliament's original intention.
We are - Campaigning to change the DEFRA guidance on how CRoW applies to caving, within the existing law, as we believe parliament intended.
This is - BCA?s campaign to confirm existing access rights under CRoW do cover caving.
This is - BCA?s campaign to confirm that existing access rights under CRoW do cover caving ? as Parliament always intended.
Tim Allen
January 2016
?
CRoW Liason Officer Report to Council ? January 2016.
Actions from the 10th October Council meeting
1. Concerns had been raised by NAMHO over how CRoW may affect access to mines. I liaised with NAMHO and conducted some further research with the assistance of Council members and was able to send them a letter to put in front of their next meeting. It is hoped that the letter would alleviate some of the concerns mine enthusiasts held over CRoW.
2. I have continued my research into the value of caving to our rural economies with some progress. This is opportune as on 28th October, David Rutley, MP and Chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Mountaineering managed to secure a Westminster Hall debate on the ?economic value of outdoor recreation?. This lobbying has benefited all outdoor interests and managed to get outdoor recreation firmly written into the new ?Strategy for Sport?. http://ukcaving.com/board/index.php?topic=19633.msg252332;topicseen#new This focusses more on the benefits of physical activity rather than just sport, where the well-being of participants is valued as much as sporting success. Amongst other factors the strategy will need to bring together government departments such as Health, Sport, Local Government and Environment. This is far too big an issue to be covered in this report but there are great opportunities here for caving, significantly the timing of the BCA access campaign over the next few years. As for the value of caving to our rural economies I have focussed on the northern caving region. Here, preliminary study of fact and estimate show a value between ?3-4million per year (excluding commercial businesses such as outdoor shops and show caves). Extrapolated across all caving regions it is easy to see that this would amount to ?10million per year and have a significant effect on the specific areas frequented by cavers.
3. I have also looked into offering advice to our Access Controlling Bodies on the Defra interpretation of CRoW. I liaised with the BCA administrator on timing so that the advice could be sent out with renewals. This did not leave me enough time especially as the idea has developed. Having spoken with our access group and members of the exec it has been suggested that this should be expanded to include advice on; section 26 restriction, bats, the BCA campaign, reassurances to landowners and their liability. I hope to work on this with colleagues in time for the next Council meeting although it has been suggested to issue the final guidance through C&A.
Ongoing Work
1. I have continued with my efforts to gather wide ranging support for BCA?s position on CRoW. This has involved contacting other outdoor affiliated bodies and lobbying MP?s and the authorities. In addition to the access campaign I have also used the opportunity to promote caving and encourage a more positive image of our sport. This has been welcomed and embraced by all who I have met.
2. As a caver local to the Yorkshire Dales I have, over the last few years, attended a number of meetings of both the Yorkshire Dales and Lancashire Local Access Forums (LAF) in order to boost the profile of caving in my area and to highlight various local access issues. The LAF is the statutory consulting body set up under the CRoW Act and comprises an equal mix of landowners, business interests and outdoor groups. It would be this body that government consults over any access issues so it is important to explain our case to these forums where possible. My attendance at the LAF and the issues I have raised have been warmly received and has led to the opportunity to take the issue to the wider national LAF. I now intend to follow this up in my role as BCA CRoW officer.
3. I have continued to liaise with other outdoor groups as indicated in my previous report. All have been supportive. I have had some conversations with David Rutley MP in his role as chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Mountaineering and with the BMC as the group?s secretary. This has all been very positive and has led to me being invited to attend a meeting with outdoor access specialists, which I shall attend in London next month. This contact also helped me to organise the VIP caving trip mentioned below.
4. I also met with my local MP, Julian Smith where we discussed promoting the value of caving to the local area, some local access issues and the wider BCA campaign. As a government whip Mr Smith cannot get involved in the campaign directly but has offered to write to the Secretary of State on our behalf. Council will remember that senior conservative MP, David Davis also wrote to the Secretary of State on our behalf. His advice as an experienced politician was to keep doing what we are doing, by gathering support and not going away. By chance a caving colleague, and supporter of the BCA campaign met the Secretary of State at a social event. He was able to brief her first hand on our campaign. This contact will hopefully stand us in good stead for the future. Mr Smith has since written to inform me that he heard very positive things from his parliamentary colleagues about the caving trip (below) and that where the opportunity arose in Westminster he would do all he could to promote caving.
5. With the help of colleagues I organised a VIP caving trip to Gaping Ghyll in the Yorkshire dales. The trip had two purposes, one to demonstrate the positive benefits of caving to both the participants and the local community, and the second to discuss the issues surrounding CRoW and caver access. Our VIP?s had a great day out and were very helpful and supportive of BCA. The press release explains the trip in more detail:
6. I have kept myself informed of the on-going access dispute at Drws Cefn/Ogof Draenen. Without wishing to make any comment on the dispute itself the situation has escalated to a point where the outcome may have wider implications and possible impact on the BCA. I am certainly no expert in law but my observations are as follows; The entrance to Drws Cefn is on access land as defined by the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. As such and in view of other legislation such as the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 there are procedures which need to be followed by local authority and landowners. It is my understanding that any citizen or NGO may challenge the lawfulness of a decision or action made by a public body by the Judicial Review process and that is what seems to be happening here. There are strict time limits which affect Judicial Review and the solicitor?s letter referred to in this case may just be part of the pre-action protocol. The review takes place before a judge in the Administrative Court and is concerned only that the correct procedures have been followed rather than that the decision was correct. It is possible to apply to the court for a Cost Protection Order, but normally the loser bears all the costs. There is also the risk that the case may be won but the public body may make the same decision again so long as they do so in a lawful way. In my view a decision has yet to be made which can be challenged by Judicial Review. I suggest the BCA continue as it is whilst keeping an eye on any future developments.
7. At the beginning of December I participated in a WebEx online meeting with members of the BCA exec and access team. I brought everyone up to date with the campaign. The secretary may wish to report further on this meeting.
8. The following ?strap lines? have been suggested by various members which summarise the BCA campaign. They all state pretty much the same thing. Do Council agree with the summary?
We are ? Campaigning to change DEFRA's interpretation of the CRoW Act and its application to caving to reflect what we believe was Parliament's original intention.
We are - Campaigning to change the DEFRA guidance on how CRoW applies to caving, within the existing law, as we believe parliament intended.
This is - BCA?s campaign to confirm existing access rights under CRoW do cover caving.
This is - BCA?s campaign to confirm that existing access rights under CRoW do cover caving ? as Parliament always intended.
Tim Allen
January 2016
?