|Herewith a template letter to your MP. If you wish to contribute to the Consultation itself a more detailed summary is available on www.msauk.org. and at www.laragb.org. Please see the attached Pdf file for more information.
(Handwritten and personalised letters are known to be the most effective. Ensure that you put your own name and address on the letter somewhere, either at the beginning or at the end. Your MP will reply to you. If you don`t like his reply then write again, or arrange to go to see him at one of the regular surgeries that all MPs hold in their constituencies)
Don`t delay, write today.
Letter to your MP which you can cut and paste.
The House of Commons
Dear Mr/Miss ….
The use of mechanically propelled vehicles on rights of way
The Countryside Minister, Mr Alun Michael, has issued a consultation paper about new laws and regulations that will affect the use of ‘byways open to all traffic` and other minor highways by mechanically propelled vehicles. Clearly Mr Michael is concerned about the level of ‘cowboy` activity that goes on, with illegal and annoying motorcycling and driving on wasteland, open country, footpaths and bridleways, and rightly so – but the consultation paper seems to propose measures that will directly and seriously affect me, and I am not a ‘cowboy` in any way.
I have been driving my road-legal rallycar [substitute: driving my Land Rover, classic sports car, etc.] on ‘byways` and unclassified roads for XX years. I am a member of YY club/association, and I take pride in being careful and considerate to other road users atall times. I/we organise work groups to repair and clear rights of way.
Ramblers already enjoy access to around 120,000 miles of footpath and bridleway where they can be assured of not meeting other members of the public in vehicles. We have just 5,000 miles, and we are happy to share that with other users. Ramblers will also soon have thousands of square miles of ‘right to roam` land as well. I note Mr Michael`s hope that responsible users of mechanically propelled vehicles will welcome the intention, and I agree that the basic principles underlying these proposals have merit. However, the representations made to Mr Michael that have prompted the detail in the paper have misinformed and consequently misled the Minister.
Can you therefore speak please to the minister to tell him that he has been misled and get his reassurance that the interests of ordinary people like me will not be unjustifiably prejudiced, and that he will insist on being better informed by fact-based evidence before taking further action?