Leading Article: After 500 years, a historic step for the common people

EVER SINCE Gerard Winstanley and the Levellers, the question of access to open land has been close to the heart of radical politics in England. In Scotland, the struggle has been equally long-lasting, with the failure of James Bryce's 1884 Access to Mountains (Scotland) Bill one of many setbacks suffered by the campaign for the right to roam. Now, in an overwhelmingly urban nation, the issue has changed almost out of recognition and yet, in its conflict between big landowners and the common person, it retains its historic and special place.

Finally, on the eve of a new century, the trend of at least 500 years of enclosure and the strengthening of the rights of property owners is on the point of being reversed. It is apt, as we report today, that the Conservative Party, traditionally the party of property, seems to have decided that "individual freedom" has a better claim on its soul and has thus dropped its opposition to a legal right to roam.

That means that England is likely to follow the example of Scotland in legislating to give people the right to roam over uncultivated land. Earlier this month, Scottish landowners and walkers' groups reached a consensus on the definition of reasonable rights of access, balanced by the duty to exercise them responsibly. Because it was a consensus, the deal was hardly reported, even in Scotland, but it effectively decides the terms on which the Scottish Parliament will legislate when it is set up next year.

That agreement proves that ramblers and landowners can come to terms over access. Propaganda claims about ignorant urbanites trampling over gardens and crops can be dismissed out of hand - no one has ever asked for a right to roam over anything but uncultivated land. But landowners have legitimate worries; no one wants quad bikes roaring over the heather, either. The right to roam should be subject to duties imposed on the roamers to respect the countryside and the privacy of those who live in wild areas.

But the Scottish agreement also proves that voluntary agreement alone will achieve nothing. Scottish landowners only reached agreement because they knew the Edinburgh Parliament would legislate. The same applies south of the border. Labour's manifesto was worryingly evasive on this issue, promising only "greater freedom for people to explore our open countryside" - although it also mentioned a "right" to greater access.

The definition of trespass, which is to be where one has no right to be (although not an offence in Scotland), demands that there should be a specific legal right for all citizens to enjoy moorland, mountains, heath, down and common. These are places in which an individual may have property rights but in which we all have a deeper interest, which should also be recognised in law.