Planning reforms break Labour's promise to protect nature, green groups say
The Government's planning reforms break its manifesto promises to protect and restore the nation's natural environment, green groups have claimed.
The Planning and Infrastructure Bill going through Parliament overrides existing habitat and nature protections, which the Government considers to be a barrier to housebuilding and economic growth.
The draft legislation, if passed, would instead allow developers to make general environmental improvements and pay into a nature restoration fund that improves habitats on other sites.
But the Office for Environmental Protection watchdog recently warned that the Bill represents a 'regression' in environmental law and would remove safeguards for nature.
The Government's own assessment of the Bill also found little evidence green protections are a blocker to development.
The Wildlife Trusts and the RSPB are now warning that irreplaceable habitats such as chalk streams and ancient woodland, species such as hazel dormice and otters, and areas such as the New Forest and Peak District Moors will no longer be as strongly protected from development.
The groups said they have been calling for a series of amendments to tone down what they see as the most damaging aspects of the Bill but that the Government has failed to listen to their concerns or consider their 'constructive solutions'.
Now they want to see ministers remove part of the nature recovery section entirely, which they say replaces environmental protections with a weaker substitute.
The Planning and Infrastructure Bill was introduced in March and comes as Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and Chancellor Rachel Reeves argue that current nature rules have gone too far, often citing the £100 million HS2 bat tunnel.
Craig Bennett, chief executive of The Wildlife Trusts, said: 'Before the general election, Labour promised to restore nature.
'Under a year later, the Chancellor is leading an ideological charge against the natural world despite it being the very foundation of the economy, society and people's health.
'Promises have been broken, and millions of people have been betrayed.'
Mr Bennett said the Bill in its current form 'fundamentally undermines' the Government's commitment to protect nature, describing proposals on nature recovery as a 'Trojan horse' and a 'misnomer'.
He also said the organisation is 'appalled' that the suggestions it has put forward to ministers have 'all been spurned'.
The organisations also published research on Thursday arguing that nature does not block economic growth.
It found that bats and great crested newts – protected species often cited in arguments for removing planning barriers – are a factor in just 3% of planning appeal decisions.
Alongside the paper, a Savanta survey commissioned by the Wildlife Trusts suggests less than a third (32%) of the British public feel the Government has kept its promises to improve access to nature, promote biodiversity and protect wildlife.
The poll also found just 26% of the 2,035 respondents believe the Government is taking the nature crisis seriously enough while just 25% said they would back building developments in their area even if they harmed the local environment.
Beccy Speight, RSPB chief executive, said the organisation engaged 'in good faith' with the Government for months but that the current draft legislation will 'rip the heart out of environmental protections and risks sending nature further into freefall'.
'The fate of our most important places for nature and the laws that protect them are all in the firing line,' she said.
'That cannot be allowed to stand.
'The evidence clearly shows nature isn't a blocker to growth.
'The Government has identified the wrong obstacle to the problem it's trying to overcome, and that has led it to the wrong solutions.'
A Government spokesperson said: 'We completely reject these claims. The government has inherited a failing system that has delayed new homes and infrastructure while doing nothing for nature's recovery, and we are determined to fix this through our Plan for Change.
'That's why our Planning and Infrastructure Bill will deliver a win-win for the economy and nature by unblocking building and economic growth, and delivering meaningful environmental improvements.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
27 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Foreign Office staff told to consider resigning after challenging UK policy on Gaza
More than 300 Foreign Office staff have been told to consider resigning after they wrote a letter complaining they feared it had become complicit in Israel's alleged war crimes in Gaza. It is the fourth such internal letter from staff about the offensive in Gaza, which started in October 2023 in response to Hamas's deadly attack on Israel. In their letter of 16 May the staff, from embassies around the world and at various levels of seniority, questioned the UK's continued arms sales and what they called Israel's 'stark … disregard for international law'. The Foreign Office said it had systems for staff to raise concerns and added the government had 'rigorously applied international law' in relation to the war in Gaza. The reply to the letter was sent by the permanent under-secretary, Oliver Robbins, and Nick Dyer, the second most senior civil servant in the Foreign Office. They told the signatories: '[I]f your disagreement with any aspect of government policy or action is profound, your ultimate recourse is to resign from the civil service. This is an honourable course.' The reply did not address the substantive complaints by staff. The letter, first reported by the BBC, said: 'In July 2024, staff expressed concern about Israel's violations of international humanitarian law and potential UK government complicity. In the intervening period, the reality of Israel's disregard for international law has become more stark.' It went on to list the killing by Israeli forces of 15 humanitarian workers in March and Israel's suspension of all aid to Gaza in the same month 'leading many experts and humanitarian organisations to accuse Israel of using starvation as a weapon of war'. It said the UK government's position had contributed to 'the erosion of global norms', citing continued weapons exports and the visit to London in April by Israel's foreign minister, Gideon Sa'ar, 'despite concerns about violations of international law'. The Foreign Office described Sa'ar's visit as private, even though he met the foreign secretary, David Lammy. The staff letter added that 'supported by the Trump administration, the Israeli government has made explicit plans for the forcible transfer of Gaza's population'. In response, Robbins and Dyer said the department welcomed 'healthy challenge' as part of the policymaking process and had already set up a 'bespoke Challenge Board' and regular listening sessions with employees to hear concerns in this policy area. They wrote that staff were entitled to their personal views, but added it 'might be helpful' to 'remind' them of mechanisms available to those uncomfortable with policy. It went on to list a series of ways staff could raise issues, before adding that resignation was an 'ultimate recourse' and 'honourable course' for those with profound disagreements over government policy. '[T]he bargain at the heart of the British civil service is that we sign up to deliver the policies of the government of the day wholeheartedly, within the limits imposed by the law and the civil service code,' it said. The UK government's position is that Israel is 'at risk' of breaching humanitarian law, the threshold for barring arms exports, but says it is for international courts to determine if breaches of international law have occurred, which will not be fully determined for many years. Senior foreign office ministers are due to be challenged in the business select committee over why the government is continuing to sell parts and components to the F-35 programme without placing a condition that the parts are not sent on to Israel. The UK is not selling directly to Israel, and claims it has no option but to supply the parts or see the whole F-35 programme grind to a halt, affecting Nato operations defending Europe. The carve-out of F-35s from the ban on UK arms being sold to Israel, imposed in September, is being tested in the high court by the NGOs Global Legal Action Network and Al-Haq. The Foreign Office in its court submissions, likely to be the subject of cross-examination by the business committee, said it had determined Israel was not committing a genocide in Gaza, which appears to contradict the stance that only the UK courts can make such a ruling. It also said it could not take a position on specific attacks by Israel since it did not have definitive evidence. In September, Lammy announced the suspension of about 30 arms exports licences to Israel, and said the remaining licences were not relevant to the war in Gaza – although the government admits some of the licences allow exports to the Israel Defence Forces. Israel has consistently denied committing war crimes in Gaza, saying its actions are proportionate and necessary to eradicate Hamas, which it says uses hospitals and school premises to protect itself. The former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn has gathered the names of 50 MPs backing his call for an independent public inquiry into UK involvement in military operations in Gaza. Corbyn has been among MPs pressing ministers to explain why RAF jets from the UK base in Akrotiri in Cyprus fly regularly over Gaza. More than 300 surveillance flights have been recorded, allegedly in search of Hamas-held hostages. Questions are also being asked if Israel acted lawfully by intercepting the ship Madleen in international waters, containing Greta Thunberg and 11 other campaigners seeking to highlight the blockade of food into Gaza. The Freedom Flotilla Coalition , the group operating the UK-flagged Madleen, said all 12 campaigners were 'being processed and transferred into the custody of Israeli authorities'. The Foreign Office has not commented.
BBC News
34 minutes ago
- BBC News
Abramovich hopes for 'proper goodbye'
Former Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich says he wants to return to Stamford Bridge for "a proper goodbye", in his first interview since sanctions forced him to sell the club in oligarch, who the UK Government allege has strong links to Russian president Vladimir Putin, has not spoken since the sale of Chelsea and his last known interview was with Forbes in March an interview in Abu Dhabi in February for the book "Sanctioned" by Nick Purewal, Abramovich ruled out re-investing in Chelsea or, indeed, any other football club. But he said he wants to return to Stamford Bridge someday. "Perhaps one day there would be a situation where I could attend a match and say a proper goodbye, but nothing more than that," he is quoted as saying. He added: "I don't have any interest in any role in a football club, certainly not a professional role."Abramovich also says he still wants a resolution to the war in Ukraine, insisting his efforts to act as a peacekeeper in talks in Turkey in 2022 were is the first time he has spoken since he sold Chelsea for £2.5bn to Todd Boehly and Clearlake Capital, who have overseen two underwhelming years before finishing fourth this season to qualify for the Champions League and winning the Conference League. Boehly, who also part-owns successful baseball franchise the LA Dodgers and basketball team the LA Lakers, said in the book: "If you look at our ambitions for the Dodgers and for the Lakers, you're here to win, and it's our business to win; and we're doing everything we can do to win. "Our goal with Chelsea is also to win silverware, because we know, and I know, how much it means to the fans. It makes you appreciate again that sport makes people happy, especially when you win. And Chelsea is supposed to win. "But I really believe that sustained success is an investment, and no matter what business I'm in, or any industry, there are no shortcuts."Meanwhile, Abramovich's comments have emerged just a week after the UK government threatened to sue him, with proceeds from the sale of the club still stuck in a frozen bank account. The UK government wants the money to be for Ukrainian humanitarian aid, but "all victims of the war in Ukraine".Chelsea are also under investigation by the Premier League for alleged irregular payments from Abramovich-era transfer activity.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Rayner handing ‘gift' to rich foreigners, complains Chelsea landlord
Angela Rayner's plans to overhaul Britain's 'feudal' leasehold system will hand wealthy foreigners a windfall at the expense of British taxpayers, one of London's biggest landowners has said. Hugh Seaborn, the chief executive of Cadogan Estates, the Earl Cadogan's property company, said plans to make it cheaper and easier for leaseholders to buy their properties outright amount to taxpayer-funded 'gift' to affluent residents in parts of central London. The reforms were proposed by the previous Conservative government but are being pursued by the current Labour administration. Matthew Pennycook, the housing minister, said in March that the Government would abolish the 'feudal-era' leasehold system by the end of this parliament. Cadogan Estates owns £5.7bn worth of land, including more than 90 acres of Chelsea, and Mr Seaborn said that extending the new rules to cover all of the country would amount to a giveaway for wealthy non-doms with properties in plush parts of inner London. He said: 'Why should this gift be given by the Government from existing British businesses, that pay tax and are based in the UK, to wealthy leaseholders that have been represented and understood what they were buying? These aren't vulnerable people.' A 'large proportion' of leaseholders in the London boroughs of Kensington and Chelsea, Westminster and Camden 'are non-UK residents', he claimed. 'So you could surmise ... that this may not be subject to UK tax, whereas property businesses that are based here, that are family-owned, are subject to UK tax.' Cadogan Estates made a £72.3m UK tax contribution in 2024, up from £50.7m in the previous year. Mr Seaborn said: 'It undermines businesses like ours, who are investing in the area, in community, in charity, in the public realm – it undermines our ability to do so.' Under the existing leasehold system, marriage value – the term for the rise in a property's value after a leasehold of below 80 years is extended – is split 50-50 between leaseholder and freeholder. However, this is poised to be replaced by a system that awards the full value increase to the tenant. The effect will be to make it cheaper for leaseholders to buy the lease from freeholders, or make it more attractive to sell on. The new rules will also make it easier for leaseholders of a multi-dwelling property to club together to buy its freehold. Cadogan Estates is among a group of landowners and charities behind a legal challenge against the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act, which is taking forward the changes. The case will be heard in the High Court this July. Mr Seaborn said there was 'an awful lot of the Act that we support, because it needs simplifying', underlining an 'abuse of service charge' in parts of the market that is 'understandably' frustrating leaseholders. However, he said the current bill was 'a bit of a sledgehammer'. He said: 'It's beating the leasehold system rather than focusing on where the issues are. This legislation was in a very early stage of drafting, it was rushed through, and this Government has inherited it. So it's quite challenging.' Mr Seaborn said the estate was engaging with ministers but said the Government had 'made it clear that they're following through on it'. In its latest financial results, the estate said it had 'engaged extensively with ministers and civil servants fruitlessly, so have taken legal steps to protect our interests'. Cadogan Estates has said the reforms will lead to a 'material financial loss' and hamper its ability to invest in the area. The value of its residential properties slipped by 1.2pc to £1.44bn during 2024. None the less, the overall estate booked a 16.6pc yearly rise in operating profit to £140.2m last year, as well as a 1.3pc increase in the value of its overall estate. It invested £211m in property purchases and development, including spending £46m doing up Sloane Street. A Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government spokesperson said: 'We cannot comment on ongoing litigation. 'We will act to provide homeowners with greater rights, powers and protections over their homes by effectively implementing the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 as quickly as possible.'
