Peter Black and South Wales West Liberal Democrats

Stage 1 Debate on the Proposed Playing Fields (Community Involvement in Disposal Decisions) (Wales) Measure

Peter Black: I support the need to protect playing fields in principle. I think that it is important that we do all that we can to protect playing fields. I also acknowledge the efforts that Dai Lloyd has made in getting the proposed Measure to this stage. We should do more to encourage Members to bring forward proposals such as this and the Assembly Government, in supporting this so far, has set the scene for other Members, hopefully on the opposition side, to bring forward Member proposed Measures.

I also acknowledge Dai Lloyd's willingness to accept large-scale amendments to his proposed Measure in Stage 2. If anything, that would persuade me not to vote against the proposed Measure as it stands, because it is important that if we are to ensure additional protection for our playing fields in Wales, as the Minister has said, those measures should be proportionate, reasonable and affordable. As the proposed Measure stands, that is not the case. However, if we can substantially improve it at Stage 2, then we should aim to do so.

Dai said that what sparked the need for this proposed Measure was the threat to the recreation ground in Swansea. That is somewhat ironic, as everyone in Swansea thought that there was a threat to the recreation ground, thus undermining the idea that people do not know when open spaces are to be sold off, but, in fact, there was no threat at all.

The argument that statutory consultation is ineffective is not an argument for putting in place additional statutory consultation that may well be ignored. It is important to understand that the additional measures contained in this proposed Measure would, effectively, lead to the local authority carrying out two mail shots, one sending out the impact assessment and the second sending out the decision notice to everyone affected by a particular proposal. At the end of all that, the council is not under any obligation to pay any attention to the outcome of the consultation, which is the case with regard to consultations currently.

Furthermore, local authorities already have statutory obligations in respect of the disposal of playing fields or open spaces. Under sections 123 and 127 of the Local Government Act 1972, if an open space, including playing fields, is to be disposed of, a local authority must advertise its intention to dispose of that land for two successive weeks in a local newspaper-presumably, that could include the ubiquitous local government newspaper that Dai Lloyd has referred to.

On other planning matters, under the Town and Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995, local planning authorities are required to consult Sports Council Wales on planning applications affecting a playing field as well as to carry out wider consultation attached to the planning process. Therefore, there are procedures whereby local authorities have to consult. Dai's argument is that they have not been doing so, but putting additional statutory consultation in place does not mean that they will have regard for that either. Local authorities have a statutory obligation to consult and should therefore consult. If they do not, then presumably Ministers or the courts can pull them up on that. That has to be understood in the context of this proposed Measure.

My problem with the proposed Measure as it stands is that it does not do what it says on the tin-it does not provide additional protection for playing fields. It provides for additional consultation, but that is not the same as protection. As the committee has pointed out in its thorough report, which was referred to by the Chair of the committee, there may well be more straightforward ways of achieving this. I suggest, for example, that adding ministerial consent into the process might be a way forward. However, as the proposed Measure stands, particularly in relation to section 4 and the schedule of people to be consulted, it could place a huge burden on local authorities. To give you an example, with regard to the disposal of the Vetch Field in Swansea, which I am sure that everyone would accept is now past its use and should be redeveloped, everyone in the Castle ward, which is quite a large ward, would need to be consulted twice on that, and the requirement to consult any club or person who has made use of the field would be onerous. We need to take into account disposals of that scale when determining how this should be done.

In conclusion, I am not happy with the proposed Measure as it stands. I am happy for it to be amended substantially and, on that basis, and on the basis of Dai's undertaking in that regard, I, personally, am happy to allow this to go through-this is also subject to a free vote in my party.