Examination of Witnesses (Questions 280-299)
MR TOM
FRANKLIN AND
MS KATE
ASHBROOK
11 JUNE 2008
Q280 Chairman: Plain and simple.
Ms Ashbrook: Yes.
Q281 Miss McIntosh: When you said
at the outset that you would like to have uninterrupted access
along the coast, on what basis then would estuaries be excluded?
Mr Franklin: Well, this draft
legislation is specifically around coastal access rather than
estuary access going up estuaries, so, whilst we would certainly
welcome opportunities to extend access further up estuaries, we
believe that, as the point in principle for this particular legislation,
the most important is to make sure that there is access by foot
across estuaries at the first crossing point. Obviously, if Natural
England are able to go further and want to go further and get
agreement and so on, we would certainly work with them to secure
that. An example might be the Thames where it is possible to look
at extending it further inland than the first crossing point.
Q282 Miss McIntosh: You are not concerned
that there might be a sort of hidden agenda here for protecting
one type of landowner against another type of landowner, that
one form of landowner might be protected by excluding estuaries
over another type of landowner that happens to be coastal?
Mr Franklin: Certainly as far
as this legislation is concerned, this is very much about coastal
access, so that is what we think it needs to be focused on as
regards this, but, having said that, we would certainly welcome
opportunities to extend access further into estuaries as well,
wherever possible, but the most important principle is that there
is that continuous route. The problem with it just going up to,
say, a ferry crossing is that there is not then that continuous
route and we think that Natural England should be a bit more ambitious
and the Bill should be a bit more ambitious in cases such as those.
Q283 Miss McIntosh: Could you just
elaborate on how you see that working then if it is a pedestrian
crossing? I am not quite clear as to how that would work.
Mr Franklin: What we would like
is in each case for Natural England to be looking at the first
pedestrian crossing point across that estuary. That might be further
inward than the first ferry crossing point, and, if that is the
case, we would like this to go right up to that first pedestrian
crossing point rather than the ferry crossing point, but, again
(the reason that Kate mentioned), the ferry crossing point is
not continuous, is not necessarily permanent, and may, therefore,
create a block in the continuous route.
Q284 Miss McIntosh: For example,
it could be seasonal ferries only.
Mr Franklin: Exactly. That is
right.
Q285 Miss McIntosh: How much access
is there currently to estuaries?
Mr Franklin: I think it depends
on the estuary. I would say some not very much, in others quite
a lot. The Thames is quite an interesting case actually, the way
that over a period of time access has increased bit by bit, and
the Thames coastal path, very close to here, has proved immensely
popular as a result of access being increased. We think that could
be the case with other major estuaries and rivers as well.
Q286 Miss McIntosh: So you might
not actually need legislation in the future?
Mr Franklin: The Thames path along
here is an example of where it has taken an extremely long time
to get what we have got, and there are still big gaps there as
well. I quite often walk around London and use the path as a way
of getting round London. There are several parts where you have
to leave the river because there is no access.
Q287 Chairman: You talked about spreading
room, but can I ask you more specifically about the sensitivities
that the RSPB expressed to us. Particularly in those estuarine
areas where there are salt marshes, they very much felt that the
coastal trail should be the narrow, four-meter wide but no spreading
room variety. What do you think about that?
Mr Franklin: We think, again,
the powers are broadly right, which is that Natural England will
have the power to do specific assessments for sensitive sites
and impose restrictions where necessary; so that with the RSPB
we are at one in being in favour of the broad thrust of these
proposals. The RSPB is as well. So that is great. We think that
the powers are already there in the draft legislation to deal
with those sensitive sites.
Q288 Miss McIntosh: Why would you
propose an amendment on islands? Why do you believe it is necessary?
Ms Ashbrook: We are proposing
that, where there is a ferry across to an island, that should
be included, and that would bring in a number of islands which
might otherwise be excluded and would, therefore, mean the Secretary
of State would not need to make a special order for them. It makes
sense that, if there is a regular ferry, they should be seen as
part of our coastline. The Isle of Wight is the obvious example.
It seems really odd to exclude the Isle of Wight from these proposals:
you can get there very easily and it has a wonderful coastline
and a path around quite a bit of it. It just seems to us to be
a logical, sensible step.
Q289 Chairman: It is quite interesting
that you put such an emphasis on ferries to islands but not crossing
rivers.
Ms Ashbrook: We are talking about
the regularity and the opportunities really. If there is only
a very occasional ferry to an island, that is rather different,
but where there is a regular service and you can get there easily,
then we feel it should be included.
Mr Franklin: The Isle of Wight
is a classic example. It does not seem to make any sense that
there is this right around the mainland and not around the Isle
of Wight. It seems completely illogical that that would be the
case.
Q290 Mr Gray: Or Lundy.
Ms Ashbrook: Lundy belongs to
the National Trust anyway.
Q291 Mr Gray: There is a regular
ferry to it. Would you, the Ramblers' Association, like coastal
access round the coast of Lundy?
Ms Ashbrook: Yes, we would, and
I think we have, unusually, already got it, because it does belong
to the National Trust.
Chairman: We will have to go to Lundy
now. It will make a change from normal holiday walking!
Q292 Miss McIntosh: Have you worked
out how many islands would be included if you obtained your wish
and how many miles it would add to the coastal path?
Ms Ashbrook: No, I do not think
we have.
Q293 Mr Williams: What about the
Scilly Isles?
Ms Ashbrook: The Scilly Isles
are separate, are they not? They are specially mentioned.
Q294 Chairman: That is right. They
are an island; they are separate. Yes.
Ms Ashbrook: I meant they are
separate in the Bill, are they not? There is a clause which exempts
the Scilly Isles.
Q295 Mr Williams: Should they be
exempted?
Ms Ashbrook: We would like to
see access to the Scilly Isles. I do not know how many members
we have there.
Q296 Miss McIntosh: Have you had
any indication from Defra or Natural England as to whether they
support your proposal?
Mr Franklin: I am not aware of
any specific response at this stage. Obviously, we would like
further discussions.
Q297 Paddy Tipping: Can I ask you
about the practicalities of this on the ground in ten years' time.
Unlike the CROW Act, this is not a mapped approach. The sign of
reference is the proximity to the sea, so you do not think that
mapping is necessary at all, apart from showing it when it is
established, say, on the Ordnance Survey?
Mr Franklin: We think that is
right. This is a different scheme, and so it does not need to
be applied in the same way as CROW, but obviously we would very
much welcome Ordnance Survey's involvement in this to make it
very clear on maps that people have the right of access.
Q298 Paddy Tipping: So the key aim
to walkers would be signage, and there was an issue around signage
and access over CROW open country. You would want to see somebody
devoted towards that.
Mr Franklin: I think that is really
important. It has got to be really sensitive signage to local
circumstances as well, but also very clear so that people have
a sort of typography that they can follow; but it is important
that it is very, very sensitive to the particular locations which
are part of that local negotiation and collaboration as well.
As I say, we really hope that facilities like the Internet are
used to encourage people to visit different parts of the coast
that they might not otherwise have gone to.
Q299 Paddy Tipping: Once you have
got the path set up and the spreading room, just remind me who
would be responsible for its maintenance. I guess on the long-distance
path it would be the Highway Authority, is that right, with the
hope of some grant-aid from Natural England?
Ms Ashbrook: Are you talking about
ten years on?
| 
