Verum wrote:So, it isn't trampling existing private property rights at all. Good to know.
Actually, it is. Weaver has proposed that that particular private property is open to everyone, with a 4x4 or quad or dirtbike.
Maybe I can come and start a bonfire in your yard and mudbog through your garden. I don't think you'd appreciate that, nor would a lessee of land who has paid a hefty sum to enjoy his/her plot of land.
As for the leases, can you please provide a link to somewhere supporting this view, since I would be very surprised if such leases could be affected in retrospect. Obviously going forward such leases and associated conditions are entirely up to the government and laws of that time, but I don't think any existing leases will be significantly affected.
Weaver is too frikken stupid to understand Common Law and the Occupiers' Liability Act. That's why he has proposed legislation that would strip personal rights away, and those include rights on existing leases.
A lessee currently has the protection of the Occupiers' Act:
(3.1) A person who is trespassing on premises while committing, or with the intention of committing, a criminal act is deemed to have willingly assumed all risks and the occupier of those premises is subject only to the duty of care set out in subsection (3).
(3.2) A person who enters any of the categories of premises described in subsection (3.3) is deemed to have willingly assumed all risks and the occupier of those premises is subject only to the duty of care set out in subsection (3) if
(a) the person who enters is trespassing, or
(b) the entry is for the purpose of a recreational activity and
(i) the occupier receives no payment or other consideration for the entry or activity of the person, other than a payment or other consideration from a government or government agency or a non-profit recreational club or association, and
(ii) the occupier is not providing the person with living accommodation on those premises.
That would disappear under Weaver's stupid plan, as the trespasser is no longer trespassing.
Allowing people to roam on private leased land opens a whole host of liability issues for the lessee. If that dopey roamer steps in a gopher hole and twists his ankle, who pays? Under lease conditions, liability is 100% the responsibility of the lessee, and allowing everyone onto that land increases that risk exponentially.
Weaver is a complete bozo. What else does he have in his BAG-o-TRICKS?