HS2 bat farce will happen again without key Tory policy, Labour MPs tell Rayner

Labour MPs have urged the Government to go further with its planning reforms to prevent a repeat of incidents like the controversial £100m bat shed on the HS2 rail line.

Chris Curtis and Polly Billington, who co-chair the Labour Growth Group (LGG), claimed that while Housing Secretary Angela Rayner’s planning reforms were “welcome”, they would not solve the “bats vs flats dilemma” on their own.

The i Paper understands that the LGG has been meeting with the UK’s top planning lawyers to discuss solutions to stop bio-diversity claims from blocking housing and infrastructure developments and is now said to be actively considering its next steps.

A source close to the group said: “It’s become clear to us that the existing system is totally broken. It’s stopping building and not preserving nature, either. We’re not going to stand by and watch it sink our commitments to voters.”

Their intervention comes as Rayner is expected to confirm sweeping changes to the national planning policy framework (NPPF), the strategy that sets out national priorities for building, this week.

Speaking to Sky News on Sunday, she said that this new approach would ensure that concerns over protecting nature would not prevent much-needed houses from being built.

“We can’t have a situation where newts are more protected than people who desperately need housing,” she said.

“What we need is a process which says ‘protect nature and wildlife, but not at the expense of us building the houses’”.

However, writing for The i Paper, Curtis and Billington have argued that the Government needs to go further and introduce the long-awaited ‘land use framework’.

Such a framework would identify how sections of land can best be used, for example, for farming, forestry, biodiversity, housing, recreation, or infrastructure. It would help to manage the competing demands of food production, nature, and housing and infrastructure needs.

The previous Conservative government promised in 2022 to introduce such a framework by the end of the following year, but this was eventually pushed back to 2024.

The two MPs said that this “fell by the wayside as the Tories descended even further into chaos and dithering”, adding that “a Labour Government committed to growing our economy we must now once again make this a priority”.

All major political parties, including Labour, pledged to introduce the land use framework during the general election campaign, but the Government has yet to confirm when it will be delivered.

Rayner’s planning reforms

Angela Rayner will on Thursday set out a major shake-up of planning rules that could see building on parts of greenbelt land.

The sweeping changes will also see councils given mandatory targets to deliver a total of 370,000 homes a year in England.

The updated national planning policy framework (NPPF) will commit to a “brownfield first” strategy, with disused sites that have already been developed in the past prioritised for new building.

The default answer when a developer seeks to build on brownfield sites will be “yes”.

But councils will also be ordered to review their greenbelt boundaries to meet targets by identifying lower quality “grey belt” land that could be built on.

The updated NPPF will define grey belt land for the first time.

Any development on greenbelt land must comply with new “golden rules”, which require developers to provide infrastructure for local communities, such as nurseries, GP surgeries and transport, as well as a higher level of social and affordable housing.

Under the changes, councils and developers will need to give greater consideration to social rent when building new properties and local leaders will have greater powers to build “genuinely” affordable homes.

The reforms will mean areas with the highest unaffordability for housing and the greatest potential for growth will see housebuilding targets increase.

Labour’s planning reforms are designed to help deliver a pledge to build 1.5 million homes and take decisions on 150 major infrastructure projects this parliament.

The Government announced £100m of additional cash for councils, along with 300 additional planning officers, to speed up decision-making processes.

The extra money can be used to hire more staff or consultants and to carry out technical studies and site assessments.

Curtis, MP for Milton Keynes North, and Billington, MP for East Thanet, said that their constituencies “frequently [see] the claim of protecting nature used in order to delay or halt development”.

“Yet the outcome always seems to be the worst of both worlds: nature is not protected, but few new things are built either. It’s no wonder nothing ever gets done, and almost everyone involved is left frustrated and angry,” they continued.

Under the current planning system, they suggest, “new developments are forced to put in place inefficient mitigations that slow building but don’t maximise the protection of nature either”.

One infamous example is the £100m spent on a shed along the route of HS2 to protect bats in ancient woodland in Buckinghamshire, which the Labour MPs called a “ridiculous situation”.

Councils are also required to reassess proposed developments that are built within 500m of a pond to take into account any great crested newts that may live there.

Others have pointed to reports that staff at the Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant have been told to put speakers into the Severn Estuary to scare away fish from the plant’s water inlets, which some have dubbed “fish discos”.

Curtis and Billington argue that the current planning system requires developers to implement “inefficient mitigations” that delay the building of homes and infrastructure but “don’t maximise the protection of nature either.”

“What we need is a new, strategic approach where we focus on improving and restoring the quality of our natural world where we know nature should thrive,” they continued.

The Labour MPs added that any new approach to land planning should include “an acknowledgement that there will always be some compromises, including changed landscapes, bigger towns, and altered coastlines”.

“We have been changing, adapting, and tweaking this incredible land for millennia. Restoring nature, whilst being clear where the most valuable ecosystems and habitats are and protecting them, will speed up the installation of vital infrastructure, ensure we can build the homes we need, and protect our agricultural industry too,” they said.

To end the bat tunnels and fish discos, we need a land use framework that works

By Chris Curtis MP and Polly Billington MP

As campaigners committed to building more homes and protecting nature, we are acutely aware of the trade-offs that are facing the government we both support. We represent communities where homes are in short supply, and we know that those we need to build must be supplied at rates which are genuinely affordable, and come alongside badly needed infrastructure.

Yet, all too often, the effort to build is pitched as a conflict with nature. Some campaigners claim we simply can’t build more without destroying our precious natural environment. We strongly reject that false choice.

Access to nature is an essential element of life in the places we both represent. Milton Keynes was designed to maintain access to green spaces and nature for its residents; East Thanet is surrounded on three sides by beautiful seas – a vital economic asset as well as being crucial to wellbeing.

As different as our communities are, they both suffer equally from a planning system that frequently sees the claim of protecting nature used in order to delay or halt development. Yet the outcome always seems to be the worst of both worlds: nature is not protected, but few new things are built either. It’s no wonder nothing ever gets done and almost everyone involved is left frustrated and angry.

The UK is one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world. Let’s be frank: we have trashed it. If we look around us, it’s abundantly clear to everyone that the current framework for protecting nature isn’t working.

But trying to solve this huge problem through the planning system alone means that new developments are forced to put in place inefficient mitigations that slow building but don’t maximise the protection of nature either. What we need is a new, strategic approach where we focus on improving and restoring the quality of our natural world where we know nature should thrive.

The task of this government – if it is to achieve its crucial missions – is to establish a set of rules that enables balanced, sustainable growth for the long term.

The changes Government is making to the NPPF are welcome, but we won’t crack the “bats vs flats” dilemma until we have a comprehensive Land Use Framework. Fundamentally, we need to agree what land should be used for what, with nature protected where it is most effective to do so, and homes or infrastructure built in the places they are most needed. And, of course, the highest-grade agricultural land should continue to be used to feed the nation. Once that is decided, the revitalised planning system can then be used to deliver on those objectives. 

The previous Government committed to bringing forward plans for a Land Use Framework for England by the end of the year in 2023. As with so many other vital issues though this fell by the wayside as the Tories descended ever further into chaos and dithering. As a Labour Government committed to growing our economy we must now once again make this a priority.

With a more strategic approach, we can end the ridiculous situation where our system allows a converter station to be built in the middle of a national nature reserve to cut costs, but spending £100m on a bat tunnel is considered essential. In doing this, we will truly respect the value of nature not just aesthetically but as a vital resource we are actively working to promote and preserve.  

At the same time, people with homes cannot have a veto on homes being built for people who don’t have them. The relentless “yes but not here” needs to end by establishing some basic principles, including an acknowledgement that there will always be some compromises, including changed landscapes, bigger towns, and altered coastlines.

We have been changing, adapting, and tweaking this incredible land for millennia. Restoring nature, whilst being clear where the most valuable ecosystems and habitats are and protecting them, will speed up the installation of vital infrastructure, ensure we can build the homes we need, and protect our agricultural industry too.

This new Labour government was elected to deliver a decade of national renewal, with voters in places as different as Milton Keynes and Thanet clamouring for change. If our country is to prosper and if families are to have the affordable homes they need, if we are to grow more food and produce more energy at home, and if we are going to not just protect the nature we have left but restore it back to something closer to what it was before, then that must start with a planning framework that acts as the foundation for those aims.

That is no easy task, and it will require a serious public conversation about the kind of country we all want to see, but it is essential to our future well-being and prosperity.

• Chris Curtis is the Labour MP for Milton Keynes North, and Polly Billington is the Labour MP for East Thanet. They both co-chair the Labour Growth Group (LGG).