A CALL to replace the levy to the Malvern Hills Trust has been branded “confusing”.
The West Worcestershire Conservative Association has called for the levy, paid to the trust by households in six parishes in and around Malvern, to be replaced with a £3 flat fee.
The group said this should be paid by households across South Worcestershire and Herefordshire to share the burden.
Deputy chairman Sebastian Barbour has called on the trust to amend the Malvern Hills Bill, which aims to make changes to the way the trust is governed, to amend this.
The bill an out of time to reach its third reading in the House of Lords, after amendments were made by a select committee and now needs further debate after an objection was lodged by Baroness Coffey.
This debate is scheduled to take place on Thursday, October 29.
READ NEXT: What we know as Malvern Hills Bill progresses through Parliament
“We are calling on the trust to stop the bill immediately and bring back a new bill that focuses on what really needs changing,” Mr Barbour said.
“Rather than denying democracy, the Trust should be looking to make the levy-paying area fairer.
“Our proposal to charge a flat fee of £3 across a much wider area shares the burden of who pays for the Hills, making the Trust truly fit for the future.”
LEVY: Sebastian Barbour, deputy chairman of the West Worcestershire Conservative Association has suggested a replacement of the levy to the Malvern Hills Trust (Image: West Worcestershire Conservative Association)
John Michael, chair of the Malvern Hills Trust, has claimed that the Malvern Hills Acts already allows the levy to be raised as Mr Barbour suggests and that this is retained in the bill.
The House of Lords Select Committee said in their report: “Clause 36, which is not opposed, provides that Worcestershire County Council and Herefordshire Council may each contribute to the funds of the Trust such sums as they think fit.
“This power, which re-enacts section 9 of the 1909 Act, enables those Councils to treat the whole amount of their contributions as general expenses or to treat the whole or any part of their contribution as special expenses to be levied on the parishes in their area.
“The effect of the latter alternative, if it were to be adopted, would be to extend the Trust’s levy paying area.”
Mr Michael said: “Sebastian’s proposal is confusing to say the least. He will surely know that under our existing Acts – for those interested, section 9 of the 1909 Act – both Herefordshire Council and Worcestershire County Council already have the power to levy as he suggests.
“This power is retained in the Malvern Hills Bill before Parliament.
“Sebastian’s confusion does in fact highlight one of the problems we are trying to fix – it is extremely difficult to manage the Trust effectively when we have to consult five separate, detailed acts in often arcane language.”
“As people know, campaigners have been misinforming the public about the Trust and the Bill seemingly to score political points.
“Although we have discussed the Bill with the West Worcestershire Conservative Association several times now, I’d be only too happy to speak with them again to avoid further confusion.”
