Environmental organisations have not “changed their tune” on planning reforms (England’s planning bill has many naysayers. I’m not one of them, 4 June). As it stands, the bill has major flaws and is a long way from achieving a win-win for nature and development. Environmentalists engaged around the bill in good faith, but, when published, it was clear it was missing the safeguards needed – and the government’s own independent adviser, the Office for Environmental Protection, agrees.
The bill does not set out a responsibility to avoid harm to nature and communities wherever possible. We need such a duty to drive development that takes the best route for people and nature, not the low-quality option. We need the proposed Nature Restoration Fund to provide guaranteed results, with evidence to back this up. Without such guarantees the scheme allows destruction of nature on a wing and a prayer that it will effectively be restored elsewhere. Ensuring certainty of outcomes and robust protections are not just vital for nature, they are good lawmaking.
Our job is to defend nature, so we must challenge these major protection gaps now and champion the changes that are needed. If not, the whole country will pay the price for a flawed system in future, with increased nature loss, greater pollution and less healthy communities. It makes economic sense too, with nature degradation estimated to lead to a 12% decrease in GDP in coming years.
We know the system can work better – it is possible to create a planning system that works hand in hand to deliver wildlife recovery at scale, and the new homes we need. The nature sector has always been, and remains willing, to come to the table with the government to achieve the win-win we all want.
Craig Bennett CEO, the Wildlife Trusts, Beccy Speight CEO, RSPB, Harry Bowell Director of land and nature, National Trust, Ali Plummer Director of policy and advocacy, Wildlife and Countryside Link
