Memorandum by the Rights of Way Review
Committee (PI 04)
INTRODUCTION
1. The Rights of Way Review Committee encompasses
the key landowner, user and local authority organisations and
agencies with an interest in public rights of way. It meets three
or four times a year under the Chairmanship of Peter L Pike MP.
Representatives of the Department of the Environment, Transport
and the Regions, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food and
the National Assembly for Wales sit as observers.
2. The Secretariat is funded by the Countryside
Agency. The Agency and the Countryside Council for Wales provide
Vice-Chairmen. The full terms of reference and membership is attached[9].
THE COMMITTEE'S
INTEREST IN
THE WORK
OF THE
PLANNING INSPECTORATE
3. The principal legislation governing public
rights of way is the Highways Act 1980, the Wildlife and Countryside
Act 1981 and the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Local authorities
(usually county councils where there are two tiers of authority)
are responsible for, among other things, taking forward proposals
to change the network of public rights of way or to amend the
definitive maps and statements on which the network is recorded.
Changes and amendments are taken forward by means of orders made
by local authorites. (The Secretary of State may also make orders
but these are handled by the Government Offices. They do not impinge
on the Inspectorate's responsibilities for issuing decisions on
his behalf.)
4. Local authorities are responsible for
confirming orders to which there are no representations or objections.
However, where there are representations or objections, those
making them have the right to be heard by the Secretary of State
for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (for cases in England)
or the National Assembly for Wales. Representations may be made
by anyone with an interest, eg landowners, local people, users
of rights of way (walkers, horse riders, vehicles riders or drivers)
or local authorities (mainly parish or community councils).
5. The Planning Inspectorate acts on behalf
of the Secretry of State and the Assembly by confirming (or otherwise)
these contested orders. Representations are usually dealt with
through a local public inquiry although the written representations
procedure can be used. The Inspectorate handles about 200 Highways
Act 1980 and Town and Country Planning Act 1990 cases and about
200 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 cases each year. 1981 Act
cases often involve interpretation of complex historical and other
documentary evidence.
THE ENVIRONMENT
SUB-COMMITTEE'S
TERMS OF
REFERENCE
The relationship between the Inspectorate's internal
targets and the quality of decisions made
6. The Committee has expressed no views
on this issue. It is not aware of any published targets for rights
of way casework.
The Consistency of Decisions Made
7. For some time, the Committee has been
concerned about the lack of quality, consistency and transparency
in the Planning Inspectorate's decisions in cases relating to
rights of way in England and Wales. The Committee feels, strongly,
that greater clarity and explanation of how and why decisions
are reached is in everyone's interest. It supports the view that
greater consistency is needed in the way in which decision letters
are set out; and that more openness by the Inspectorate is in
everyone's interest. The Committee is compiling a register of
decisions over which there is concern.
8. The Committee is especially concerned
about the quality of decisions under the Wildlife and Countryside
Act 1981. The Committee has endorsed a proposal from one of its
members, the British Driving Society, that would lead to improvements
in the accountability and the quality of decisions under the 1981
Act. The Committee would like to see decision letters which clearly
show how all evidence has been weighed. It is not enough for decision
letters to note that other evidence or case law has been taken
into consideration when a decision appears to be contrary to previous
case law.
9. The Committee Chairman, Peter L Pike
MP, has written to the Inspectorate's Chief Executive and DETR
Ministers expressing the strong feelings about the lack of consistency
and transparency in decisions. The Committee's concerns have also
been drawn to the attention of the Advisory Panel on Standards
for the Inspectorate.
Relationship between the Inspectorate and Government
Offices
10. The Committee has expressed no views
on this issue.
The ability of the Inspectorate to adjust to changing
workloads, including the use of new technology and the volume
of Local Plan Inquiries
11. The Committee has expressed no views
on this issue.
The Treatment of Complaints to the Inspectorate
12. The Committee feels, strongly, that
complaints are not treated seriously. Members representing rights
of way users have reported to the Committee that they have largely
given up complaining to the Inspectorate about poor decisions
because the Inspectorate will not discuss their concerns. There
is dissatisfaction and frustration among practitioners in local
authorities who are also disappointed in the quality of decisions.
Members feel particularly frustrated because decisions can be
challenged only in the High Court. This is too slow and expensive
an option to be of any practical value in encouraging the improvements
that the Committee is seeking.
13. The Committee was not reassured by the
Chief Executive's reply to the Chairman's letter expressing the
strong feelings about the lack of consistency and transparency
in decisions. The Committee felt that the reply appeared to show
no understanding or appreciation of the strength of concerns among
those affected by Inspectorate decisions. Members feel, strongly,
that a change in corporate culture is needed. However, the Chief
Executive implied that the Inspectorate would act towards greater
certainty in decision letters if there was "prescriptive
Government advice".
14. The Chairman is awaiting a reply to
his letter to the Minister of State for the Environment urging
him to issue advice to the Inspectorate; to instigate an investigation
into the quality of decision on rights of way cases by the Inspectorate;
and to instruct the Inspectorate to establish comprehensive quality
control procedures so that the Inspectorate can demonstrate that
inspectors are operating consistently across the range of cases
which come before them.
Recruitment, Training and Equal Opportunities
15. Inspectors handling rights of way casework
are drawn from a panel appointed by the Lord Chancellor. The Committee
has expressed no views on recruitment.
16. The Inspectorate is responsible for
training inspectors in rights of way casework. The Inspectorate
has copied some"Advice Notes" for inspectors to the
Committee. No other training material is in the public domain.
The Committee has noted that rights of way users and highway authorities
know more about case law, evidence and procedures than inspectors.
The Committee feels that transparency in training would help members
to identify deficiencies, which could go some way towards addressing
its concerns.
17. Members have also suggested that the
Inspectorate should evaluate inspectors' training to identify
whether there was one particular aspect to the difficulties or
whether it was a general one, and that DETR should be encouraged
to improve training of inspectors.
Publicising Inquiries
18. The Committee has expressed no views
on this issue.
Assistance for Parties to Inquiries
19. As far as the Committee is aware, the
Inspectorate offers no assistance to parties to rights of way
inquiries.
Compliance with Timetables
20. The Committee has expressed no views
on this issue.
the Availability of Assessors for Specialist Inquiries
21. As far as the Committee is aware, the
Inspectorate has never appointed an assessor for a rights of way
inquiry.
Rights of Way Review Committee
February 2000
9 Ev. not printed. Back
| 
