Memorandum submitted by the Local Government
Association (DMB 16)
This response is submitted by Simon Aries (National
Access Advisor) on behalf of the Local Government Association.
1. The Local Government Association (LGA)
agrees that improving access along the English coast is a positive
step, but it requires careful planning and appropriate funding
to ensure success and provide a worthwhile benefit to the widest
range of users.
2. While the Draft Bill to a greater extent
does provide for the Government's vision of "A coastal environment
where the rights to walk along the length of the English coast
lie within a wildlife and landscape corridor that offers enjoyment
..." the LGA is concerned that a focus on linear access will
not necessarily cater for the desires and needs of the majority
of users.
3. Work undertaken by local authorities
during the development of Rights of Way Improvement Plans reinforces
the fact that the majority of pedestrian users who access the
countryside (or want to access the countryside) find short circular
routes, which are well surfaced, easy to follow, most attractive
etc. In reality, a long distance walking route has limited appeal.
4. While it is accepted that once a linear
route around the coast is "on the ground" it may lead
to development of more appropriate links and circular paths. Off-route
development is not part of the remit of Natural England or explicitly
catered for in the Draft Bill. The LGA is concerned that further
more appropriate development will be limited and the full benefits
of increased access to the coast will not be realised.
5. A more focused approach to improving
access to the coast would be a more effective use of limited resources
and provide the greatest benefit to the greatest number of users.
6. In terms of a single linear route, the
new legislation is relatively cost effective in that it secures
the Governments vision for an estimated cost of £50 million.
The LGA does not consider this sum is realistic and most significantly
notes that no clear provision has been made for the on-going maintenance,
management and development of the route once it is in place. This
is the Association's greatest concern and considered to be a fundamental
flaw in the proposals.
7. The expectation appears to be that once
the route is established (by Natural England) it could fall to
the relevant coastal access authority to manage and maintain the
path. Without appropriate, secured and on-going funding this extra
burden on over stretched budgets will not be manageable. Access
authorities have to prioritise work and activity and by default
must focus on statutory duties. Without proper funding in place
the route could fall in to disrepair and become unusable in places.
8. In reality, it is not considered feasible
or practical that Natural England could take on the responsibility
for on-going maintenance. It is accepted that local access authorities
are best placed to manage the route, but this can only happen
if appropriate funding is provided.
9. While the LGA welcomes the lower occupier's
liability, the issue of overall liability does need careful consideration.
For example, infrastructure on the route may not be the responsibility
of the landowner/occupier ie a bridge put in by Natural England
during establishment will not be the liability of the landowner.
Failure to maintain this structure could lead to injury and it
is unclear in these circumstances where the liability to address
any claim would lie.
10. The LGA is also concerned about how
easy in practice the issue of roll back will be to deal with and
manage. On certain areas of the coast erosion is virtually a constant
feature and in practice the need to roll back the route could
be a pretty regular task. To avoid this, original alignment should
take in to account risk of erosion and site the route accordingly
to minimise as much as possible the process of roll back. Additionally,
it is unclear whether the expectation is that the local access
authority will deal with roll back in the longer term. Again,
if this is the case, then it can only work with appropriate levels
of sustained funding.
11. While the LGA does not have a particular
view on the issue of landowner compensation, it should be noted
that the starting point of no compensation does mean that a positive
"partnership" approach could be difficult to engender
in certain circumstances. This may be a particular factor when
dealing with roll back.
12. There will need to be clarity about
implementation and establishment to avoid confusion and disappointment.
A suggested 10 year time scale is ambitious and there will need
to be milestones along the way to ensure progress is being made.
A thorough communication strategy will be required so people can
understand where and when they can safely and legally access the
coast. Part of this work should include the development of outcome
orientated performance indicators.
Simon Aries
National Access Advisor, Local Government Association
May 2008
| 
