Examination of Witnesses (Questions 300-310)
MR TOM
FRANKLIN AND
MS KATE
ASHBROOK
11 JUNE 2008
Q300 Paddy Tipping: Yes; sure.
Ms Ashbrook: It is not clear actually,
because it is not clear that the route itself will be a public
highway. In places where it is, yes, it would be the Highway Authority,
in other places, not necessarily at all, and we think that is
a grey area that does need sorting out within the next decade
because, clearly, somebody has got to take the responsibility
for maintaining this and at the moment it is not clear who it
is or where the money will come from.
Mr Franklin: It would be a tragedy
if after ten years it started to get holes in it and fall apart
as a result of not planning ahead, but also what we hope is that
by that stage this is going to be such a popular part of the coast
that it will be very clear that it needs to be maintained in as
good a standard as—
Q301 Paddy Tipping: The £50
million set-up cost. There was a set-up cost from Natural England.
Are you confident that they have got the money to do it, and is
it enough?
Mr Franklin: I do not know that
we would be able to say how much is specifically needed in entirety—it
is not our area of expertise—but we rely on Natural England
to make sure it has got its sums right.
Q302 Chairman: Do you think it right,
in the light of your earlier response, that the project should
be established without having clarified the responsibility for
maintenance of the path at the outset? You made a very pressing
point that ten years' down the line you did not want to see that
the path is falling into disrepair, et cetera, because we have
not sorted out maintenance. Do you not think that ought to be
done at the beginning?
Mr Franklin: What we say is that
there are all sorts of publicly funded projects where it is not
clear at this stage what is going to happen in ten years' time.
This would not be the only one to fit into this category.
Q303 Chairman: No, but it is a pretty
fundamental part of making certain that this line of route which
you put considerable store by and which you understandably identify
as conferring particular benefits on local communities, otherwise
we would not be doing it, is sustained, so surely we ought to
sort out the responsibility aspect at the beginning?
Mr Franklin: I do not think it
is necessary to do that before the legislation is enacted, but
we would certainly say that early on in that ten-year period these
discussions are held so that it is as clear as possible as early
as possible what is going to happen after those ten years; but
we do not think that that is a prerequisite for the legislation.
Q304 Mr Gray: A theoretical possibility
would be that, if no government funds or other funds became available
and the path then did fall into disrepair, then the whole thing
would be a waste of time; so surely it is a prerequisite. If you
do not know in advance who is going to look after the damn thing,
what is the point in having it?
Mr Franklin: As I said, this would
not be the only publicly funded scheme where it is not clear exactly
what is going to happen after ten years.
Q305 Chairman: The reason I ask is
because you will know from your own experience, for example, the
Lake District National Park, with the enormous popularity of some
routes, the considerable resource that has had to be expended
in formalising the path so that the land, effectively, does not
collapse and that people can continue to enjoy it; but there is
a restriction on the amount of resource which is available to
do that kind of work in some of the really popular areas. One
of the witnesses said, I think on Monday, that the most likely
places to fully embrace it are what they describe as the honey
pot areas. Lots of people come along, the thing starts to wear
out and everybody looks round and says: "Who is going to
look after this?"
Mr Franklin: Again, that is why
we think it is important at an early stage that these things are
clarified, but we do not think it is a prerequisite before the
legislation is enacted. We hope and believe that this scheme is
going to be as popular as some of the long-distance routes have
been.
Q306 Chairman: I am sure they will
be very popular.
Mr Franklin: If there is the demand
for it, it will be maintained because it will be so important
to the local economies.
Chairman: You have made your position
clear. Thank you very much indeed.
Q307 Mr Williams: I am sure it is
in the Bill itself, but in establishing a path there will be a
considerable amount of furniture required in terms of gates and
stiles and those types of facilities. Is that the responsibility
of the landowner or is it the responsibility of the local authority
or Natural England?
Ms Ashbrook: Again, it depends
on the status of the route. Some parts of the route will be a
highway, but, in any case, we would say we would want to see the
minimum of obstructions along the way, we would want to see a
minimum of gates and stiles, because this route should be able
to be enjoyed by as wide a sector of the population as possible.
We advocate, as does Natural England, as the local authorities
do, that where possible you have gaps and then gates and then
stiles.
Q308 Mr Williams: But there will
be some. Some of this land is grazed land, is it not?
Ms Ashbrook: Yes.
Q309 Mr Williams: There may need
to be fences to manage it, and then you are going to have either
gates or stiles?
Ms Ashbrook: There may need to
be something, and in the first ten years Natural England will
be funding that through the local authorities.
Q310 Chairman: Thank you very much
indeed for the benefit of your views, in terms of your oral evidence,
and thank you again for sending written evidence and for agreeing
to supply some further information, particularly following some
points raised by Mr Tipping. If there is anything else that you
want to include in supplementary evidence, we are always delighted
to hear from you. Thank you very much for your contribution to
our inquiry.
Ms Ashbrook: Thank you very much
for inviting us.
| 
