Support us from £3/month
We deal with almost 1000 cases a year assisting communities, groups and individuals in protecting their local spaces and paths in all parts of England and Wales. Can you help us by joining as a member?
We are dismayed that the government has done a U-turn on the protection of green spaces during the passage of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill in the House of Lords.
Wharton Park, Durham, currently protected under the Public Health Act 1975. Credit © Copyright Bill Boaden and licensed for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence.
On 13 April the Minister for Housing and Local Government, Baroness Taylor of Stevenage, backed an opposition amendment which spelled out a procedure whereby local authorities which have failed to follow the rules of public advertisement for disposal of open spaces under section 123(2A) of the Local Government Act 1972 can recover the situation(1). Yet when Lord Banner (Conservative)(2) proposed an amendment to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill last year, the government opposed it, and instead, on 3 November 2025, announced a ‘wider review of existing protections’.
Now, with government support, a much longer amendment from Lord Banner has been added to the Devolution Bill at report stage, with minimal scrutiny.
In supporting it, Baroness Taylor said that ‘Existing protections for urban green spaces and recreational land are fragmented, complex and very difficult to navigate.’ Yet that is what she promised her review would navigate. Five months on it has not been started.
We are deeply concerned about the implications of the amendment, which has potentially unknown effects and could erode people’s rights to enjoy their local authority-owned spaces.
Says Helen Monger, one of our case officers: ‘It is foolish to accept this new procedure before fully understanding the implications. We are particularly concerned about the potential effects on public rights when transfers of open space occur between different local authorities, as is set to happen under local-government reorganisation. We also deplore the fact that this amendment can be applied to future disposals of land, not just to rectify a past mistake.
‘The government has acted in bad faith in promising a review, only to accept the amendment which pre-empts it. In the debate, the Minister dismissed suggested refinements to Lord Banner’s amendment (tabled by Lord Lucas and others), while admitting that she needs more evidence to understand the problem. While she again promised the review, we remain unclear about how it will operate, its scope, terms of reference, or timetable.’