The draft Marine Bill, anticipated to be enacted at the end of the year, is designed to give the public access to England's entire coastline and the draft Heritage Protection Bill will create a new system based on a unified register for historic assets, replacing the current separate systems of listing, scheduling, and registering.

Of the two, the Marine Bill gives greater cause for concern, though there are fears that there could well be difficulties in the small print of the Heritage Protection Bill (HPB).

Opening up coastal land is not the problem per se. indeed with the long distance footpaths already in place here both along the coast and the Fen rivers, most land in the area is already "open".

The CLA criticism is that the proposals ignore the fact that country businesses and landowners would have their enterprises blighted and face increased risk of legal actions against them.

In particular farmers will be facing greater liability for farm animals and for buildings which were never designed for public use.

The government intends to spend £50 million on the scheme over a decade, but compensation to landowners is not included in that sum.

We fear, therefore, that the true cost of establishing an unbroken ribbon of access around the coast would be borne by landowners because these proposals simply would not compensate rural businesses for the loss in the value of their land and property.

Moreover, while we welcomed Natural England's willingness to include landowners in the coastal access consultation process – the subsequent proposals failed to make any allowance for maintenance of the new coastal rights of way.

There are also far too many unresolved issues to make this workable without riding roughshod over private landowners and businesses.

As soon as private property is opened to the public, expectations of that access change completely. 

For instance, steps to a private beach which are safe for the owner might not be regarded as acceptable for public use. Who then would be liable in the event of an accident if the steps were not upgraded? The same would apply to buildings, fences, walls, agricultural machinery and even ploughed land.

The proposals as they stand are wholly unreasonable and these issues must be resolved before the bill becomes law.

Then there are the real threats to landowning businesses on the coast, whether they are in farming or tourism.

In some cases, farming practices may have to be changed, and visitor attractions may no longer be able to charge guests for what would become effectively 'open to all'. The liability issue is also frightening in its potential consequences for land and property owners.

We also remain unconvinced of any proven user need for this increased access. Studies have shown how visitors behave when they visit the coast, and we are not sure what they or local businesses might gain.