|
Bob Russell: On that last point, which part of a local authority would be held responsible for dealing with such matters? The hon. Gentleman has just referred to the planning laws, and he spoke earlier of public health matters. Will the council be dealing with the problem as an environmental matter or a planning matter? Does he have a view on which it ought to be?
Mr. Pound: I would not be so presumptuous as to say what a local council should do, particular so ancient a one as the hon. Gentleman's. In reality, it is a matter of planning and enforcement. For the majority of local authorities in England and Wales, enforcement is part of the planning process. It is therefore reasonable for that to be the locus. However, most local authorities have an arboricultural section,
Column Number: 010
which would clearly be involved, and environmental health officers, too, may come within the ambit.
We are not here to specify; the Bill provides a structure, and it is up to the local authority to decide how to enforce it, whether through its environmental health officers, its arboriculturalists or its planning and enforcement department. It matters little; what does matter is that something should happen.
Mr. McNulty: Should the Bill be successful, the Government will issue guidance on the process as it impinges on local government. However, my hon. Friend is right that it is entirely a matter for the council.
As my hon. Friend said, we shall also be making clear regulations on the level of fees. The process needs to be seen in the context of the link with clauses 1, 2 and 20. One of the problems with previous Bills on the subject, which were blocked for some reason or other, was, as we found in our debates on clauses 1 and 2, the difficulty of defining either the compliant or the high hedges.
After a review and due consultation on the nature of the definition and of the complaint, clause 20 deliberately allows for those areas to be revisited in the context of the complaints process outlined in subsection (3). Once it has been put into practice, we shall have a body of experience on how it works. Most eventualities are covered, and in a flexible manner. That is one of the Bill's strengths, which is why the Government support it.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 4 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 5
Remedial notices
Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
Mr. Pound: Before moving on, I draw the Committee's attention to a letter from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, copies of which may have been sent to other hon. Members. In it, Ben Stafford, the society's parliamentary officer, expresses concern that clause 5 may be contra-legislative, in that it could impact on the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. For instance, a nesting bird might be found in a leylandii hedge that was pruned under the Bill. Mr. Stafford gently and generously reminds me that such offences are punishable by penalties of up to £5,000 or up to six months' imprisonment—per egg. However, I am assured that there is no contra-legislative effect. Local authorities will act in accordance with best practice and guidelines. It is unlikely that osprey eggs will be scattered to the four winds by the whirling chainsaws of the Colchester arboriculturalists. Of that, I am confident.
The clause deals with remedial notices, which are to be drawn up by local authorities and set out the action that must be taken to remedy the adverse effects of the hedge. In most cases, we are talking about a specific requirement to reduce the height of the hedge, and possibly an ongoing requirement to maintain the hedge to prevent further problems arising. The local
Column Number: 011
authority cannot require the removal of a hedge or its reduction to below 2 m in height. Hon. Members will be aware of the extensive correspondence that ensued after the Second Reading and Committee stages of earlier attempts to legislate, when opponents stated that to reduce a high hedge to 6 ft would kill it. I am assured by Hedgeline that many such hedges that were reduced to that height 15 or 20 years ago are flourishing, and I have seen some of them. The lopping or semi-castration of such hedges does not kill them.
The clause sets out in detail what must be included in a remedial notice. As well as specifying the work that has to be carried out on the hedge, it must, among other things, indicate when the initial remedial work should be carried out and explain the consequences of failure to comply with the notice. Although there is a time limit for carrying out the work to remedy the original problem, a continuing requirement to keep the hedge at its reduced height would be open-ended. That maintenance requirement could run for as long as the hedge remained on the site. A remedial notice will therefore be binding not only on whoever owns or occupies the land at the time it is issued, but on their successors.
Finally, as long as the remedial notice is in force, there is an obligation on the local authority to register it as a local land charge. In that way, prospective buyers of the property would be alerted to the commitment that they would be taking on.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 5 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 6
Withdrawal or relaxation of
requirements of remedial notices
Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
Mr. Pound: I mentioned on clause 5 that a remedial notice could last for ever—or at least for as long as the hedge remains on the site. It is important, therefore, that the notice is not set in stone, for all time. For that reason, clause 6 provides that a local authority can withdraw a remedial notice or waive or relax its requirements. Unless the Committee would like me to speak for longer, I commend the clause on that basis.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 6 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 7
Appeals against remedial notices and other decisions of relevant authorities
Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
3 pm
Mr. Pound: The clause provides rights of appeal against a local authority's decisions under the Bill.
Question put and agreed to.
Column Number: 012
Clause 7 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 8
Appeals procedure
Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
Mr. Pound: The clause allows the Secretary of State to set down in regulations the procedure for dealing with appeals made under clause 7. There is a long list of the criteria that the regulations might cover, from specifying the grounds for appeal to the awarding of costs. As these are purely procedural matters, the regulations will be subject to the negative resolution procedure in Parliament. I am assured that the Government intend that there should be prior consultation on draft regulations.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 8 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 9
Determination or withdrawal of appeals
Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
Mr. Pound: On the one hand, I am grateful for the dispatch with which we are proceeding, on the other I am getting a tad breathless. Clause 9 describes the powers of the appeal authorities—that is, the Secretary of State or the National Assembly for Wales—in determining appeals. Under the clause they may allow or dismiss appeals either in total or in part and they may quash or vary remedial notices; this is remarkably permissive legislation. They may also issue such notices in cases in which the local authority has decided not to do so.
Mr. McNulty: Briefly, not least to allow my hon. Friend to draw breath, I shall make two points on clauses 8 and 9 which may be of concern to hon. Members. First, the Government consider that the initial local authority decision, together with the appeal process and the further possibility of applying to courts by way of judicial review, comply with article 6 of the European convention on human rights. I know that that was troubling hon. Members. Secondly, the planning inspectorate is likely to be the body to which appeals will go in England. That is still under discussion, but it is the way in which we are minded to proceed should the Bill complete its passage through both Houses.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause 9 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
The Chairman: Order. I do not want to spoil the hon. Gentleman's moment in the parliamentary limelight. However, if, for the convenience of the Committee, he would like me to take together some of the clauses that he does not wish to speak on, I can do that.
Column Number: 013
Clause 10
Powers of entry for the purposes
of complaints and appeals
Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
Mr. Pound: I thank you, Mr. Atkinson, not just for the able way in which you are chairing the Committee, but for your kind comments. I would say only that I wish that I had known that before.
The clause relates to the powers for entering the land, both to establish whether there is a problem and in connection with any subsequent action. It provides for prior notice, supplementary powers, safeguards and appeals inspectors, and delineates the offences.
Bob Russell: Bearing it in mind that we are talking about quite large living structures, why should it be necessary physically to enter the land? Would not it be possible to take photographs—to stand and admire—so that landowners need not experience the nuisance of the heavy-footed local authority sending in its troops?
Mr. Pound: I do not recognise the description of the heavy-footed local authority—the jack-booted gauleiter is a breed that we do not recognise in west London. Yet again, the hon. Gentleman is mistaken in the perspective from which he views the problem. In many cases, one will have to visit what is literally the root cause of the problem to establish its precise location, if for no other reason than to establish where ground level is. The clause is drawn sensitively so that the facts can be established. If the facts were not established, it is unlikely that appeals against enforcement could be resisted.
| 
