The Planning and Infrastructure Bill is currently making its way through Parliament. This Bill is being advocated by Government as the answer to speeding up both development and nature recovery. In reality it falls far short of giving any confidence that it is more than a mechanism to allow developers to ‘pay to destroy’ nature.

In my last blog I discuss how development need not be at the expense of nature – there are some excellent examples of where the right approach has been taken. However, creating the false narrative that wildlife is to blame for low development rates, or that it has to be either nature or housing not both, is harmful to nature and unlikely to tackle the lack of affordable housing. Sadly, in recent weeks we have just seen more of the same rhetoric.

Yet the stated aim of Part 3 of the Bill is for a ‘win-win’ for nature and development – something that in the second reading debate recently MPs from across the political spectrum enthusiastically supported. And nature certainly needs a win-win – we are in an ecological crisis with 16% (1 in 6) of species threatened with extinction. The Planning and Infrastructure Bill should present an opportunity to secure nature recovery at scale and to inspire closer working between sectors to deliver solutions.

So, what’s gone wrong and what can be done about it?

Part 3 includes the Nature Restoration Fund, designed to speed up both planning decisions and nature recovery, so far so good. However, allowing developers to pay into a levy for the environmental damage their plans cause, comes with the risk of undermining three crucial environmental principles:

• the 'precautionary principle', which prevents environmental destruction before we fully understand what’s at stake.
• the 'mitigation hierarchy', which encourages developers to avoid harm to nature in the first place rather than simply pay to pollute.
• 'the polluter pays principle', replaced by a simple levy on all developments rather than the highest payments being paid by those causing most harm.

The Bill as currently drafted would allow for an informal estimate of harm with an appropriate fee to be paid by developers, in line with Environmental Delivery Plans (EDPs) set up and administered by Natural England. The Bill introduces a new concept, the so-called “overall improvement test”, but this is vague, legally flimsy and open to manipulation. The Secretary of State for Housing will also have the discretion to determine whether this test has been met, creating a loophole for political, rather than scientific, decision making. There is also no guarantee that the Nature Restoration Fund would be spent within the area that the development is happening, reducing local people’s access to nature and potentially setting back local nature recovery efforts.

There must be safeguards in place to ensure that what is set to be lost through proposed development is properly understood, otherwise how will anyone know if the Environmental Delivery Plans have worked? Plans, places and people also need to be ready to deliver restoration, which is an added concern in a climate where government agencies like Natural England are under continual pressure and budget cuts.

Last week, The Wildlife Trusts joined together with a coalition of environment organisations in writing to Defra Secretary of State Steve Reed and Housing Minister Matthew Pennycook to highlight the ‘urgent repairs’ needed to the new planning reforms. Over 30 environmental organisations agreed that “as it stands, the Planning and Infrastructure Bill would weaken environmental law, risk local species extinction and irreversible habitat loss, and jeopardise delivery of the Government’s legally binding Environment Act targets”.

Amendments are required to the Bill to:

• Apply the mitigation hierarchy at plan and project level.
• Follow scientific evidence – there must be clear evidence that strategic approaches are effective.
• Deliver benefits upfront as standard – nature cannot rely on promises alone - a recent report found that only half of requirements for developers to mitigate harm to nature had been kept.
• Ensure benefits substantially outweigh harm – measures must deliver significant environmental improvements (rather than be “likely” to).

The Planning & Infrastructure Bill is now at committee stage, when a group of MPs will bring forward, discuss, and select amendments to the Bill.

At this stage, it is very important to raise your concerns about the Bill and the problems it will cause for nature. Speaking up can help us to secure a pause and rethink on Part 3 of the Bill.

Contact your MP with your concerns - remember personal messages have the biggest impact - include details of your local wildlife, green spaces and why nature is important to you and urge them to support these crucial amendments.

Contact your MP