Defra again contradict the AT claim that the law is clear

[KeithD]

3 years ago the Angling Trust got very upset when Defra contradicted their view that the law concerning public navigation rights on unregulated rivers is clear in requiring riparian landowner (or those that hold the fishing rights) consent. Fish Legal made a formal complaint and the AT claimed success in demonstrating that they were correct in their interpretation of the law.

But, just last month, Andrea Leadsom, the Secretary of State for the Environment, Farming and Rural Affairs again confirmed that the law is unclear.

In the sense that no court has ever ruled definitively one way or the other the law IS unclear but, we believe, the evidence on which any future court determination would be based remains totally compelling.

See the latest River Access For All News item for full details.

[Borgwitha]

I was concerned when Andrea Leadsom was made Secrertary of State, but this is a bit of good news from her.

Andrew

[KeithD]

I was concerned when Andrea Leadsom was made Secrertary of State, but this is a bit of good news from her.

Andrew

This is not a political action on her part. No doubt she is acting on the considered advice of the departmental specialists.

[Crow]

This is not a political action on her part. No doubt she is acting on the considered advice of the departmental specialists.

Most likely. She's not regarded as the brightest spark in the government.

[Mal Grey]

Interesting, and hopeful.

[25272527]

An interesting and helpful note as far as it goes. It is still peddling the government line that local agreements, voluntary arrangements etc are the way forward. She also seems to imply that government has no interest in any issues arising around navigation rights which are for the courts not government to determine, not sure I've seen that so explicitly put before. Basically saying on the one hand there needs to be a balance between interests, which is fine, but on the other hand it's not something that we're interested in so go away you bad children and let the nice judiciary sort it out if you can't stop squabbling. I guess at the moment the last thing that they're going to be considering is taking on board a new project so for the forseeable future we can probably forget any government interventions. So, we may as well continue accumulating evidence for if a court case ever emerges in order to establish the legitamacy of historical rights.
Mike

[cloudman]

She says that Kayakers and Canoeist need to agree access with land owners, she does not say that navigation needs to be agreed with land owners. I interpret her remarks as referring to access to the water as in the same paragraph she clearly confirms her view that navigation is unregulated.

My personal view is that no one will force a court case in the foreseeable future as both sides have too much to lose, I think while we are in this state of limbo we should concentrate on securing as much access to the water as we can in addition to preparing for a court case so as not to be caught off guard.