Memorandum submitted by Brian Wright (DMB
29)
Defra's "English coastal route" option,
with its uncertain quantity of "spreading room" (SR)
on the landward side and exclusion zones may disappoint the access
coalition. The Coalition would have preferred the new arrangements
to apply equally to a broad swathe of landward SR, irrespective
of any main route. I understand Defra's view that boundaries on
the landward side must be accurately mapped, to reduce the risk
of trespassing, whether wilful or accidental. The coast corridor
campaign was daring, but "the zone" was perhaps too
vague, without defining the main route. Having achieved so much
under CROW, the anxiety to implement Section 3 for the largest
possible area along the coast ASAP was understandable.
Regarding landward spreading room (LSR), the
visionary solution could be a Code + Mapping Principle (CMP),
with a prescribed but flexible timescale. CMP would not apply
definitively to any LSR until it is mapped, but there would be
de-facto access within areas which are easily accessible at present,
apart from designated wildlife sites. Post-2007 fencing would
be disregarded in assessment of definitive LSR. "Rolling
back" arable to create new habitats is a more complex prospect
and could be an aim but not a condition of CMP regarding LSR.
Compensation could be considered regarding fringe arable in LSR
in some cases, as costs may be relatively modest, depending on
the achievable breadth of the corridor in each location.
If the access groups agreed to this flexible
approach, much could be achieved within the next few years. If
the promises of politicians are found wanting, perhaps the public
will swell the ranks of the access groups once again, and more
may see access as a voting issue. I do not see this as a party
political issue. Conservative and Liberal controlled councils
will surely realise the benefits to be gained for their residents
and visitors from vastly improved coast access, if the subject
is approached with goodwill.
Therefore, we should aim to inspire all local
councils around the coast to adopt coastal access as a core objective,
especially in respect of LSR. Access enthusiasts should become
more involved with local councils if they under-perform. Full
engagement will require compromise on all sides, though the interests
of conservation must be paramount.
The Charity Commission has stated that if an
organisation cannot achieve its purposes without changing the
law, it cannot be a charity. But if greater access cannot be achieved
without changing the law, this puts access campaigning charities
into great difficulty. Currently, only Parliament can decide if
new laws would be for the public benefit. Perhaps this aspect
of charity law needs to be changed, or further clarified, to give
campaigning charities more flexibility or clearer guidelines.
In my view, freedom of expression in political campaigning is
only effective without the fetters of charity regulations. Others
are entitled to take a different view. Brave political vision
is required for the national scale. However, charitable thinking
is required on all sides if the best deals are to be negotiated
locally under CMP and LSR. In a sense, Defra has chosen to adopt
a charitable approach towards landowners and businesses. I hope
that landowners and businesses, as well as the access groups will
reciprocate to make the coast a safe and joyful habitat for all.
Brian Wright
Ramblers' Association Board candidate 2008
Former Publicity Officer, Oxfordshire Area of the
Ramblers' Association
Former Chairman, Common Land Cause
Former Assistant Secretary, Open Spaces Society
Former Public Rights of Way Officer
May 2008
| 
