The government ignored its nature watchdog’s advice in weakening rules on pollution from housebuilders in England, the Guardian can reveal.
Michael Gove, the housing secretary, and Thérèse Coffey, the environment secretary, recently announced they would be ending what they termed “defective” EU laws, which require developers to offset any extra nutrient pollution they cause in sensitive areas, under the habitats directive. These areas include the Lake District and Norfolk Broads.
Ministers are aiming to remove the legal requirement via an amendment in the House of Lords, which requires local authorities to ignore potential pollution risks when approving developments. It will be debated on Wednesday.
Gove and Coffey’s amendment proposes that instead of forcing housebuilders to invest in local wetland sites to soak up any extra sewage pollution and mitigate damage, this legal requirement would be scrapped and taxpayer money would instead be used to double the funds for a scheme by Natural England to reduce nutrients such as nitrates and phosphates in waterways. These nutrients choke the life out of rivers and cause damaging algal blooms.
Despite the increase in funding to Natural England, no officials from the quango came forward to endorse the announcement at the time. Now correspondence from the nature watchdog to Lady Barbara Young of Old Scone, a Scottish Labour member of the house, shows the watchdog said the rule changes were not necessary and that the current scheme was working to deliver homes and reduce nutrients.
The advice from Natural England recommends making developers pay for the pollution: “Our experience in similar schemes suggests that upfront, fixed-rate contributions from developers could be faster and offer more certainty in enabling planning permissions to be granted and support emerging green finance markets.”
It also said the European Union habitats regulations, which were carried over into UK law after Brexit, and which this amendment would undermine, had worked in delivering homes and reducing pollution. “There are a number of well-established schemes that implement the [habitats regulations] with regard to housing, where a case by case approach has been replaced by a more strategic scheme – familiar cases include the Thames Basin Heaths scheme, mitigating housing pressure operating across 13 local planning authorities, and the national district level licensing scheme which has replaced the need for individual newt licence solutions for great crested newts.”
Natural England pointed out that its nutrient mitigation scheme had thus far offered credits to developers to enable more than 3,500 homes and two temporary prisons, with a pipeline of schemes for a further 4,500 homes in place for this financial year. It said that in total all providers across England had created sufficient mitigation for approximately 16,000 homes, with a well-advanced pipeline to enable an additional 35,000 new homes.
Although the government said current rules choked small and medium housebuilders, Natural England said the scheme “has deliberately prioritised [small and medium-sized] housebuilders, so for example in the Tees catchment we were able to meet demand for credits for all small developments (50 homes or less)”.
Despite this advice, the government went ahead with plans for the amendment. Wildlife groups have accused ministers of ignoring Natural England. Craig Bennett, the chief executive of the Wildlife Trusts, said: “The government brought forward outrageous plans to weaken environmental law in the final stages of the levelling up bill, without any public consultation. Now it is plain that they have ignored their own advisers as well. The result is poorly conceived plans that will not work, but will leave lasting damage to rivers and to UK environmental protection.”
Dr Richard Benwell, the chief executive of the environmental coalition Wildlife and Countryside Link, added: “Natural England’s advice reveals that this regression – which would expose protected river habitats to more pollution, while letting polluters off the hook – is totally unwarranted. Environmental charities are united in opposition to these plans, and we hope all parliamentarians who care about rivers and nature will resist them.”
Peers are trying to squash the bill. The Duke of Wellington, a crossbench peer, has laid an amendment that would nullify the government’s one, and he has support from other Tories. Lady Jenny Jones of the Green party is hoping to force a vote against Gove and Coffey’s amendment which would delete it from the bill. The Office for Environmental Protection has also written to the secretaries of state, calling the move a “regression” in environmental standards.
Young added: “The government’s proposal would force local authorities to ignore pollution, even when it is plain to see. In the process, it would take a wrecking ball to the habitats regulations, the UK’s most important nature laws. The advice I have received from Natural England shows that both are unnecessary and that effective other measures are available to release much needed houses and protect their environment. I plan to oppose these provisions when they come to parliament tomorrow.”
A government spokesperson acknowledged Natural England had suggested alternatives to ripping up the EU-derived law and said: “We believe the approach we are taking will best deliver our objectives of unlocking much needed homes, continuing to offset the small amount of additional nutrient pollution caused by new housing, and shifting our focus from mitigation to site restoration. Over 100,000 homes are held up due to retained EU laws and will be unblocked between now and 2030, delivering an estimated £18bn boost to the economy while protecting the environment.”
