Current Political Situation and Latest News
Current Political Situation and Latest News
Lady Gardner tries to amend ASB Bill | Lady Gardner's Question in Lords | Some Tory MPs telling constituents Bill needed amending | Question in House 11th July | Ministerial Statement 20th June | Report Stage of Pound Bill | Content of Pound Bill | To qualify to use the new Law | Committee Stage of S. Pound Bill | 260 letters to Minister | Steve Pound Hedge Bill gets 2nd reading
Lady Gardner tried to get the whole of the Government-drafted High Hedges Bill put into the Home Office Anti-Social Behaviour Bill which is at present going through the Lords. She was unable to get the amendment tabled as it did not entirely fit in, but another amendment to do with High Hedges has been allowed. This is unlikely to be really suitable for us, as I understand, but it will keep the subject alive with the Government and we hope exert some pressure on them to say what they are going to do about the Bill they have drafted.
Contents of this page |
Index pages
lady Gardner asked the question in Lords on 15th July. 'Whether they will introduce a bill to control high hedges'? Much interest was shown and there was a fair length discussion.
The Government spokesman was Lord Rooker. He reaffirmed the Government's committment but did give any assurances as to timescale. One of Lord Rooker's encouraging comments was,
Some Tory MPs are now telling their constituents that the Bill needed the amendments tabled by a group of Tory MPs at the Report Stage. We feel that somehow they have derived a completely wrong impression of the draft Bill.
If these amendments had succeeded no one currently suffering from a hedge problem would have been helped and very few future hedge-victims. Owners of tiny gardens would still face 13-foot high hedges while only those new hedges less than 10 metres from a building would be controlled. There were many other amendments to undermine the Bill.
These are some of the suggested amendments. Do these amendments help your hedge problem? Decide for yourself:
Contents of this page |
Index pages
Text of business question and answer by Rt Hon Peter Hain, Leader of the House.
Lynne Jones (Birmingham, Selly Oak): My right hon. Friend will be aware that the High Hedges (No.2) Bill was recently talked out. The Government are aware of that Bill's importance to alleviating the misery caused to thousands of people throughout the country by high hedges. Indeed, some of my constituents, who are members of Hedgeline, were very pleased to receive a ministerial statement with a commitment that the Government will make every effort to get that Bill on to the statute book. Will my right hon. Friend discuss how that can be achieved with colleagues in the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister? After all, it is a very simple Bill; apart from the odd loquacious Member, it has all-party support; and it should not take up too much time with Government support
Mr. Hain: I very much agree with all the points that my hon. Friend makes. It was scandalous that the Conservatives talked out that Bill - the hon. Member for Christchurch (Mr. Chope) was specifically responsible for doing so - and I will certainly consider any opportunity to resurrect it, because all Labour Members recognise that it is an important issue to address.
Contents of this page |
Index pages
The Report Stage of the Stephen Pound was not completed. It started at 11.30 and went through till 2.30 on the 20th June and was then deferred to July 4th. As expected there was no time available for it on that day.
Account of the Bill's progress when it ran out of time on the 20th June 03 and Ministerial quotation of the same day.
C. Chope was on his feet for most of the session during the reading of the High-Hedges Bill and that of the Bill which came before it on the day. There were three amendments to the previous Bill lodged by C. Chope and Edward Leigh. The promoter of that Bill expressed himself to be unaware of their interest in the subject of this Bill, which was to do with lottery funding. The two mentioned MPs spoke at great length on these amendments, finally withdrew them and then went on to enlarge on issues on general procedure.
There were numerous amendments to our Bill lodged mainly by the same people. One supportive MP was heard to say that if a hedge were to be planted there in the house he would not see C. Chope by the time he had finished talking. The amendments included ones to make the Law non-retrospective (new hedges only), ones to make the victim pay for any lopping, ones to ensure that only hedges within 10 m. of a building qualified, and so on. If these amendments had been adopted the Bill would have had power to help only an extremely small minority of hedge victims. These amendments took little account of the problems which the legislation is supposed to be addressing. (Mr Dismore's amendments were tactical and designed to be withdrawn on the day - unfortunately the tactics did not work as expected)
The Tory Party front bench maintains that it is in support of this legislation and we believe that the opposers of the Bill told the Tory Environment Minister and some of our Tory supporters that their, amendments were designed to improve the legislation.
The MPs who opposed the Hedge Bill obviously wished to protect an Englishman's long established right to oppress his neighbour with an unreasonably high-hedge and they obviously have absolutely no concern for the owners of small gardens or possibly they do not know of the existence of small gardens.
'We should be addressing people who are growing leylandii of up to 60 ft in urban locations We should have a narrow Bill', said Edward Leigh MP in the Report Stage debate.
Stephen Pound was wonderfully self-possessed and effective throughout the dismal proceeding. People are suffering now and the hedges are still growing. They have been growing higher during the six years in which Hedgeline has tried to get legislation. This law is long overdue. It is barbaric if the Government postpone putting it through any longer.
Hedgeline will continue to work for this essential legislation.
The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) gave us a Ministerial statement at about 4 pm on 20th June. It states that the Government will make every effort to get the legislation through.
Quotation from Government Minister, Yvette Cooper MP, of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. "I am extremely disappointed the Bill didn't get through the Commons today.
"High hedges can make some people's lives a misery and cause great friction between neighbours. This Bill is a sensible way to deal with cases that neighbours can't resolve.
"The Government believes that legislation is needed in this area and we will make every effort to get it onto the statute books.
"I would like to thank Stephen Pound for his hard work and pay tribute to the efforts of Hedgeline, who have campaigned so vigorously on this issue."
Please would members not dissipate their energies. What is important is to ask our MPs to persuade the Government to adopt this Bill put it through quickly.
Contents of this page |
Index pages
The Stephen Pound High Hedges Bill (PMB) is a Government drafted Bill and the text is available on the ODPM website
The proposed Legislation applies to evergreen and semi-evergreen and predominantly evergreen hedges and semi-evergreen over two metres. It stipulates that after the law is passed householders, suffering from a problem hedge, should first make certain recommended approaches to the grower. If these fail a complaint may be made to the local authority. The local authority will then consult both parties concerned and determine the height at which the hedge must be maintained on an annual basis. The height will be determined with reference to the form of nuisance the hedge is causing and detailed guidance notes for local authority officers will be provided by the Government.
The legislation provides effective enforcement procedures.
Under the revised Bill light deprivation and the 'BRE Guidelines' do not now form the sole criterion on which height rulings will be made. A variety of issues can now be taken into account. It will now be up to a hedge-victim to make a B case for himself.
The range of criteria to be considered in determining a hedge's height will come in the regulations which the Government will draft to go with the Bill. These are expected to include light deprivation, safe height for trimming, plant damage, proportionality to garden and whether the hedge is oppressively high. Root damage is not allowed as a direct ground for complaint as proof requires expert witnesses and such complex disputes cannot be dealt with, within the framework of this legislation.
The full current text of the Hedge Bill is to be found on the Government website. It is presented in a choice of format. The present form of the Bill would be the best legislation we are likely to get at this stage of the game.
Contents of this page |
Index pages
The position will have changed when the Law is passed and the victim will then be arguing from a position of some power. It seems that the proposed legislation will therefore require new approaches to be made to the grower.
Contents of this page |
Index pages
The Stephen Pound Hedge Bill passed through its Committee Stage with no amendments.
It was on the afternoon of Wednesday 7th May. We had not expected such an early slot considering that the Bill is a Private Members Bill which is being sponsored by a low placed Ballot winner. We are receiving reports from many sources that our Government is now actively supporting.
Things are looking very promising.
It seems as if the days of the hedge bully are shortly to come to an abrupt end. We quote from one of Stephen Pound's speeches in the Committee -
High Hedges Bill select committee debate
Contents of this page |
Index pages
Minister, Tony McNulty has received 260 letters from different MPs asking for a new law to be brought in to curb hedge nuisance. This represents a huge amount of support in Parliament.
Contents of this page |
Index pages
The Bill was given its second reading dead on the dot of 2.30 which was the end of the allotted time. There were no 'no votes', and a very loud 'aye' shout. The volume was augmented by numerous MPs who were waiting in the wings in case their votes should be needed. The Bill now goes to the Committee Stage. There are likely to be ten Government members and two from each of the other parties sitting on the Committee. There is as yet no date set. There will then be a final reading in the Commons and Lady Gardner will take it through the Lords again ( a formality if the Bill is the same as the Lady Gardner Bill when it left the Lords).
The chances of getting legislation in this session i.e, before November and even of getting it before the Summer recess look good to us. Nevertheless we must bear in mind that nothing is certain on the political and parliamentary scene and that a small number of MPs have made suggestions which have potential to emasculate the new Law. I am advising that we keep up the lobby and the publicity campain. There is a Government factsheet on Private Members Bill procedure in case anyone would like to know more about about this very complex matter. It is in PDF format. http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/fs04.pdf
Return to Contents of this Page ARCHIVE INDEX - Records Prior to Legislation
"Something must be done. Things cannot be left as they are, so we must make every effort, as I said. The Private Member's Bill route may fail completely. At the end of this Session both Bills may fail. The Session ends in November so both Bills are still before Parliament". (Column 761
Hedgeline asks the Government to make this a Government Bill and to get it through as soon as possible.
Text of present Bill. .
'Failure to comply with a remedial notice is an offence punishable on summary conviction by a fine not exceeding £1,000. It also makes provision for daily fines if the requisite work remains outstanding. I would like to point out that people will not be prosecuted simply for growing hedges. The provisions will come into play only if someone refuses to comply with the local authority's remedial notice.
If any hon. Member thinks that the provision is unnecessarily draconian, let me say that it is the Minister's opinion, and that of many of our advisers, that it is essential to have fines of such levels. The magnitude of the pain caused to people by unthinking or malicious neighbours is commensurate with the extent of the fine.
The Hansard record of the debate
The Campaign
INDEX PAGES
This page was written and constructed, and is maintained by Clare.
Created on a Mac
© Copyright Clare, Hedgeline.