Examination of witnesses (Questions 320
- 339)
WEDNESDAY 15 DECEMBER 1999
HELEN PARTRIDGE
and MICHAEL FULFORD
320. Do you consider that there are too many
leisure facilities in the countryside and that too many could
spoil it?
(Ms Partridge) I think too many could. I think we
are talking about the right kind of facilities, and we are talking
about facilities provided for rural communities for themselves
to enjoy but also the countryside as a resource for urban and
rural communities to enjoy. So there are two elements to that
argument.
321. Do you not think that a leisure facility
which would bring in a lot of people could change the whole ethos
of the area?
(Mr Fulford) Can I just say, I think that in the leisure
industry, being so diverse and the nature that it is, then this
is manageable by local decision-making, and that leisure provision
can be managed on three levels, either for the community themselves
to enjoy, or as a driver for economic development, or indeed as
a way of managing the access from the centres of population to
that area, and without the leisure industry to manage that access
it would not be accessible.
Mrs Gorman
322. Could I ask you, first, who funds your
organisation?
(Ms Partridge) We are mainly a membership-funded organisation.
We represent over 6,500 leisure professionals, so we are a professional
Institute, a professional body.
323. What leisure professionals?
(Ms Partridge) Mainly local government leisure officers,
but we also have representation from the private sector and voluntary
sector.
324. Are you advocating charging more for public
access to rural areas?
(Ms Partridge) I do not think we are talking about
public access, I think we are talking about facility provision.
I think what we are recognising is that, with greater access to
the countryside, the cost of maintaining and developing the infrastructure
for that access has to be met from somewhere, and what we are
saying is that that must be recognised in the greater access to
the countryside debate, and that maybe there needs to be a greater
emphasis looked at, at ways and means of raising income from providing
those facilities.
325. When you say greater access, you imply
that access is not available at the present time, so presumably
you mean open spaces for walking around in; is that what you mean,
by that?
(Ms Partridge) No, I am talking about access to the
countryside for any type of leisure activity, not just access
by foot.
326. What stops people going to the countryside,
if they want to go to the countryside, they have only got to get
on transport and get there, have they not, there are not barriers
up, are there, when you hit the green belt?
(Ms Partridge) The barriers are not necessarily getting
to the resource, the barriers are enjoying that resource for the
leisure activity that you want to undertake.
327. So would you think that we should have
more things like golf-courses, or race-courses, or fishing resources,
because people go there to do something, by and large, do they
not?
(Ms Partridge) Yes.
328. And so you would advocate more of those
activities being planned into the countryside?
(Ms Partridge) Where demand says that it is necessary,
whether it is local demand or whether it is anticipated demand
from urban populations.
329. So, in doing that then, you would obviously
be looking really at the way in which people visiting the countryside
regard it, that is to say, is it free for people, or should people
be expecting to be paying for that, and should the Government
take that on board with things like tourist taxes, and so on?
(Ms Partridge) I think there is a different side of
it, whether you are talking about paying for a facility to enjoy
for recreation or sporting activity, or whether you are paying
as a tourist to stay in an area for a longer period of time. We
would not advocate, necessarily, a tourism tax, we think there
are various different ways of raising income to pay for the provision
of a facility and the resource.
330. What we are talking about is, how do we
make the countryside more viable, are we not, and that is what
you are talking about? And people do not, generally speaking,
just go out for a walk in the countryside. I walk round my area
in the country lanes and I do not see a living soul, on the weekend,
so I do not know where all these people are, queuing up to go
for a walk in the countryside. I am just interested in trying
to get your vision of how the countryside will be different if
people from your Institute have their way, and how that might
conflict with the interests of the people who are living in the
countryside, because nobody wants whatever it is in their backyard.
So do you advocate a more liberal planning attitude on the part
of the councils that represent the people who live in the countryside?
How are you going to get over this one; by legislation?
(Ms Partridge) I think legislation has a role to play
in it, because I think there are too many barriers at the moment
put up, and voluntary access has shown that it has not been proved
to produce any further quality or quantity in access, so I think
legislation has a role to play. But, again, it is very much a
local issue and local people have got a role to play in the facilities
and the activities that they want in their own backyard. The moves
to produce things like local cultural strategies, where cultural
now brings in tourism, leisure, sport, play, creative industries,
and managing those together in a strategic way and involving local
communities in the preparation of local cultural strategies, is
one way forward of addressing the issue.
Dr Ladyman
331. I wonder if you would agree with me that
townies like me actually sometimes do not find the countryside
very welcoming, because we do not know how to access it and enjoy
it? And it perhaps comes back to what Mrs Gorman was asking you,
we have notions of what is private, private territory, based on
our knowledge of a town, but we do not know where we can go in
the countryside. Would you agree with that, and, if you do agree
with it, how do we make the countryside more welcoming, so that
people like me actually will go and enjoy it?
(Ms Partridge) I do agree with that. I think there
is a lot of misinformation given and there are a lot of assumptions
made about access to the countryside. Solutions, is a more difficult
one. I think appreciation by town-dwellers of the benefits of
the countryside needs to be brought forward more, and urban green
space has a role to play in understanding the issues around countryside
and open spaces.
Mr Brake
332. Earlier, in response to Mrs Gorman, you
said that too many barriers have been put up. Your evidence seems
to be suggesting that too many barriers have been put up for off-road
vehicles. Are you really advocating more access for off-road vehicles?
(Ms Partridge) What I am advocating is that, within
the access to the countryside debate, that is happening at the
moment, and the `right to roam' legislation that is going through,
there are other issues surrounding access to the countryside by
other sports and other activities that have not been addressed
within the current debate.
333. So is that, yes, you are advocating more
access for off-road vehicles?
(Mr Fulford) It depends what you mean by access. I
think managed access is perhaps the word. The point about helping
townies to enjoy the countryside is that that can be achieved
by managing opportunities, and if one of those opportunities,
which is supported by the local community, is to provide `off
the road' motor sports opportunities then that is fine. Now that
is not saying that 4x4 vehicles can drive up every bridleway,
but it is a way of managing the land space to take account of
an activity that most people do not want in their backyard.
Christine Butler
334. Which of your client group would you be
supporting on this issue?
(Mr Fulford) From our point of view, representing
the managers of leisure facilities, we would promote the idea
that these things can be managed.
335. Which of your client group are you backing,
when you are talking about off-road vehicles; they are not local
authorities, I am assuming?
(Mr Fulford) The issue is that there are client groups
out there who want space for things that people are not particularly
keen on, like motor sports.
336. I think I have taken your point.
(Mr Fulford) We have got to find somewhere for them
to go.
Mr Brake
337. Perhaps we can move on to a sport which
is probably more acceptable to people, which is canoeing, and
do you think there is a problem with access to rivers for canoeing?
(Ms Partridge) Most definitely. If I can give you
some facts, very briefly. There are 32,000 kilometres of main
river in this country, in the UK, there are 5,000 kilometres of
statutory navigation, which includes the canal network, so that
is 27,000 kilometres of river, mainly in private ownership; 500
kilometres of those, less than 2 per cent, have voluntary access
agreements on them for canoeists. So canoeists, legitimately,
without trespassing, at the moment, only have the right to use
less than 2 per cent of the resource in this country.
338. What can be done to improve that access?
(Ms Partridge) A very in-depth review of the legislation
that relates to private ownership of rivers.
Chairman
339. Most of those rivers are being used by
fishermen, are they not?
(Ms Partridge) Most of those rivers, yes.
|
