Conservationists concerned that newts are being used to mask real reasons for slow rate of house building
The RSPB, the UK’s largest conservation charity is refuting the Prime Minister’s headline grabbing claims that newts are responsible for the Government’s inability to deliver new housing and construction projects.
Despite working to the same regulations as France, Germany and the Netherlands, all countries the Prime Minister singled out as successful house builders, Number 10 has claimed environmental legislation is responsible for delays in construction. In fact, based on information submitted by the Government, the UK is not only protecting proportionately less land than these countries, but the important habitats that are being protected are in worse condition.
According to official statistics published in the Natura 2000 Barometer, in the UK less than 9% of our land are protected, compared to over 15% of Germany and around 13% of both France and the Netherlands.
Martin Harper, the RSPB’s director for conservation said: “We are absolutely right to compare ourselves with other European nations, but not for the reasons the Prime Minster thinks. On the continent other countries are able to support their home builders and construction work without compromising their environmental standards.”
“It sounds ridiculous to blame newts for the problems of our housing market, and that is because it is. This view is not consistent with the Government’s 25 Year Plan for the Environment, it is not consistent with wanting to establish world leading environmental standards and it is not even consistent with the Government’s own independent report on why the UK is slow at building new homes.”
In October 2018, Sir Oliver Letwin published his Independent Review of Build Out Rate, a report commissioned by the Government to look at house building in the UK. The report concluded that the UK is building too many similar types of home and this was not what the housing market wanted or needed.
Martin Harper continued: “Time and time again the public tells politicians that they do not want to see any weakening of our environmental legislation. And to reinforce this, in the last few months we have all gained a greater appreciation of how important it is to have easy access to our natural world.
“If the Prime Minister wants to help the housing market then it is time to look at how developers can work in harmony with nature, to make assets of streams, pools and woodland and the amazing species that rely on these important habitats. And, of course protecting those species like the great crested newt that, by the Government’s own assessment, is in decline.”
The RSPB is calling on the Government to remember that the purpose of the planning system is to deliver the right development, in the right place, at the right time, for public benefit. And this includes significant environmental benefits, for instance protection of valued wildlife habitats, public access to green spaces (even more important in a post-Covid world) and avoidance of flood risk.
[registration_form]
Rather than blaming newts that can’t answer back, should Boris not be looking to councillors in our market towns to see where the problem lies.
Take the small market town of Boston in Lincolnshire. A walk through the high street and market place will reveal a town centre that is quickly dying.
Despite millions spent around twelve years ago on pedestrianisation of the centre and a new shopping mall, there are many shops that have remained empty for years. Large shops that leave large units that nobody can use and smaller shops that, if lucky, will become one of many, run down charity shops.
As the banks disappear the problem will be exacerbated. After coronavirus, this is set to become even worse.
And the councillors seem blind to it.
The town is ringed by new housing estates, retail parks and industrial units, all built on farmland that used to grow crops. Farmland that becomes ever so precious and needed if someone mentions rewilding!
With apologies to Raworth, Boston is now a doughnut.
If we want to put the commerce on the outside of a town, why not convert the old, attractive Victorian town centres into housing?
The answer to that is often the intransigence of councillors. The town centre is ‘traditional’!
Well it’s dead. The good news is that it is not beyond revival. The once lovely market place could be a lively mix of smaller specialist shops, cafes and housing. The big bonus is that many residents could then walk or cycle to work on the edge of town.
Sadly I see this situation in so many of our small towns, and lately, larger towns and cities.
What is needed is a new brand of councillor, one with foresight and vision and planners who will accept that if a shop has been empty for ten years, you might as well bow to the inevitable and allow conversion to housing.
All with the added bonus of not having to disturb newts.
In the past, the RSPB has been slow off the mark in weighing into the fray – it has also been wishy-washy in its comments.
Hats off to the organisation – and to Martin Harper – for getting stuck in on this one!
It is depressing how frequently politicians single out newts in attempts to ridicule those who care about the welfare of the environment.
Here’s hoping that organisations such as Natural England and the county wildlife trusts back the RSPB stance.
My only slight disappointment is that it was not the chief executive who issued the statement – that would have given it greater force. Come on, Beccy Speight – time you got on the front foot!
Incidentally, I used to work in Boston so I concur with Paul Fisher’s well-considered comments about the town.
James – I’m sure Beccy Speight is on the front foot, running the RSPB. The RSPB issued the statement. It starts “The RSPB…” Surely that’s as powerful an origin as a statement from the RSPB can get.
Quite frankly Boris sounds slightly off his “chump” rather like Trump,
Very well said Martin Harper of the RSPB. When Prime Ministers are such complete idiots we have to speak up and make them look like idiots they are.
Very close to where I live, some land was bought by developers about 1976! They ‘sat on it’ for many years then the first application was refused. A second attempt, which must have been more than 10 years ago, was successful with the REM application submitted 3 years ago. Since then very little has happened. I think developers will only proceed when they think the market is right for their maximum profit, so lack of house building has nothing to do with newts but with ££££s!