Fears that biodiversity net gain might be compromised are unfounded, argues Sophie Smith and Charlie Croft
In a hard-hitting report, the cross-party Environmental Audit Committee (EAC) recently warned that without substantial private investment and clear commitments from ministers, the UK may not meet its pledge to protect 30% of land by 2030 and offer communities greater access to nature.
In light of the EAC report, recent media responses have raised a particular concern that the incoming Planning and Infrastructure Bill could overshadow Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) and inadvertently undermine efforts to put the country on track to meet its nature targets. However, this media concern may be premature.
Focus on sustainability
Sustainability has come into sharp focus as Labour’s current growth agenda prioritises substantial housebuilding and large-scale infrastructure development, with the Planning and Infrastructure Bill (PIB) aiming to unlock existing barriers to growth. The PIB includes provisions for the Nature Restoration Fund (NRF), which would allow developers to mitigate the impact of development on specific environmental features identified in Environmental Delivery Plans (also to be introduced via the PIB to be brought forward by Natural England to set out the levy payable into the NRF).
Many of the concerns raised by the EAC suggest that it is unclear whether the Government will be seeking to abolish the BNG regime and/or replace with new initiatives within the PIB generally, or the NRF in particular. The Committee urges Ministers to set out unequivocally the Government’s support for BNG and to ensure that BNG delivers on the Government’s aspirations for the policy.
The report recommends that the Government undertakes an impact assessment to evaluate how the policies interact. It should also implement regulation to increase the integrity of nature markets, the paper adds. Finally, it is asking the Government to provide more clarity on existing compliance rules and how they intersect, the EAC states.
This planning system is big enough for the both of us
To put this into some perspective:
- The BNG requirements were introduced by the previous government and at that time hailed as world-leading legislation as part of the Environment Act 2021, it is perhaps not surprising that the new Labour Government has chosen to focus its media attention to its own new policy initiatives rather than those of the previous administration.
- That does not mean that BNG will be sidelined. There has been substantial investment in embedding BNG in the planning system and at no point has the
- Government suggested that the BNG regime will be replaced in favour of any new regimes.
- Indeed, the parliamentary under-secretary of state for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has made it clear that BNG will “work together” with the NRF.
Where do we agree with the EAC is that, given these complex and connected new provisions, it will be crucial for developers to understand the interplay between the BNG requirements and those of any new scheme to be introduced, whether through the NRF or otherwise. The overall goal of ensuring greater protection for nature whilst also accelerating the delivery of much-needed new homes and infrastructure can only be achieved by engaging with these provisions at an early stage. Any guidance from the government on the interplay will of course be welcome, although we suspect this will come forward as the legislation beds in.
The EAC fears that a perception of a move away from BNG will cause uncertainty in nature markets is all very well but that perception is not grounded on any trailed policy.
There is also inevitably going to be some fine tuning of the BNG system as it beds in. For example, the government is currently consulting on various amendments to the BNG regime following its operation over the last year. Again, it should not automatically be assumed that the intention is to sideline BNG but to find a solution that finds the right balance between competing goals of home creation and environment protection.
The reality is that BNG is now part of the planning system and BNG sites are in demand. A more integrated and transparent approach to environmental policy may be welcome but there is no reason to think that BNG isn’t here to stay.
Sophie Smith, associate and Charlie Croft, senior associate at Forsters
Subcribe to news and views
