Scrapping housebuilder water pollution rules in England
| Malcolm Blackmore |
👍
Tue 29 Aug 2023, 19:19 This could have a serious impact on Charlbury and the length of the Evenlode Valley. Although disagreeing with the Nimbys' opposing housing developments, built for the wrong sort of person (mayhap impecunious and/or disabled and unfortunates?) - especially within a minutes walk of the railway station (more housing on the south east corner of town, too far to walk comfortably from what should be a transport hub to get people out of cars who are able-bodied..). Apart from overloading, even more, an already overwhelmed Sewage Treatment works along the line of settlements, this just makes it easier for more Spivs to make more dosh by making more rabbit-hutch, ticky-tacky rubbish - built to the lowest standards of Europe. Long article pasted below; and below that a response from builders it won't really make much difference: Scrapping housebuilder water pollution rules in England to cost taxpayer £140m Under Lords amendment, developers will no longer have to offset nutrient pollution from new homes’ sewage Helena Horton A woman uses a fishing net as she stands in a stream The nutrient neutrality scheme is aimed at saving England’s waterways from being overloaded with nitrates and phosphates, which cause algal blooms and choke oxygen from rivers. Photograph: Ian Forsyth/Getty Images Taxpayers will pick up the bill for pollution by housebuilders, government officials have admitted, as rules on chemical releases into waterways are scrapped. If an amendment in the House of Lords tabled on Tuesday passes, developers will no longer have to offset the nutrient pollution caused by sewage from new homes. The government has said it will double Natural England’s wetland funding to £280m in order to show it is trying to meet the requirements of its legally binding Environment Act. This extra £140m will come from the public purse, the government confirmed. When asked by the Guardian whether this meant the taxpayer was now picking up the bill for pollution caused by developers, a government official responded “yes”, adding that while “the polluter pays principle is very important”, it was having too many adverse impacts on small- and medium-sized housebuilders. Sunak tweeted on Tuesday: “I want to see more homes built. It’s also what local communities want. But sometimes hangover EU laws get in the way. It’s not right. So I’m cutting the red tape to unlock thousands of new homes and I’m stepping up action to protect our environment.” The nutrient neutrality scheme, aimed at saving England’s rivers from being overloaded with nitrates and phosphates, which cause algal blooms and choke oxygen from rivers, currently allows developers to pay for “credits” to improve local wetland areas. This allows them to offset pollution. But the new amendment allows planning officials to ignore the extra pollution caused by sewage from new homes in sensitive areas and runoff from construction sites, with the taxpayer paying for the offsets instead. Announcing the change, the levelling up secretary, Michael Gove, and the environment secretary, Thérèse Coffey, said they were getting rid of “defective EU laws”. However, officials claimed scrapping the rules would not weaken environmental protections due to the new taxpayer funding. “Now instead of the polluter paying, the costs have been dumped on the environment and the taxpayer,” Craig Bennett, the chief executive of the Wildlife Trusts said. “Time and again the costs go on the environment and the taxpayer as a result of lobbying by industries and what we have seen here is another example of very effective lobbying from the construction industry. “It is not only terrible value for money for the taxpayer but it’s breaking promises to the environment made only weeks ago by Rishi Sunak. How can we ever trust environmental promises he makes again?” Housebuilders have rejoiced in the news. The executive chair of the Home Builders Federation, Stewart Baseley, said: “Today’s very welcome announcement has the potential to unlock housing delivery across the country, from Cornwall to the Tees Valley, where housebuilding has been blocked despite wide acknowledgment that occupants of new homes are responsible for only a tiny fraction of the wastewater finding its ways into rivers and streams. “The industry is eager to play its part in delivering mitigation and protecting our waterways. We look forward to engaging with government on the right way to do so, now that ministers are acting upon the arguments that builders both large and small have been making for so long. “With some areas having been blighted for four years, the prospect of a swift resolution will be much-needed good news for companies on the verge of going out of business, their employees and for households most affected by housing affordability pressures. Builders will be able to bring forward otherwise stalled investment in communities and get spades in the ground, so we need parliament to get this solution on to the statute book.” There is discord between Natural England, Defra officials and ministers, and the levelling up department. Though many of the measures regard new funding and responsibilities for the government’s advisory body Natural England, its chair, Tony Juniper, declined to comment on the news. He had previously said removing these rules would result in “rivers full of sewage”. The planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essential Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. Sam Hall, the director of the Conservative Environment Network, said: “Conservative environmentalists support both home ownership and environmental stewardship. The limited options for housebuilders to offset nutrient pollution from new homes meant that nutrient neutrality rules were acting as a de facto block on much-needed housing. “A better approach for both nature recovery and housing supply is possible, and so the government was right to seek an alternative. The government’s mitigation measures, which will avoid additional nutrient pollution entering rivers until 2030 when water treatment works will have been upgraded, are welcome. “It is disappointing, however, that the government has chosen to exempt housebuilding’s nutrient pollution from the habitats regulations, rather than seek a holistic reform with developers paying proportionally for their pollution.” Richard Benwell, the chief executive of Wildlife and Countryside Link, said: “What the government is proposing here is to remove legal protections for nature, throw away requirements for polluters to pay, and instead use taxpayers’ money to try to fill the gap. But a single, short-term capital injection will do nothing to make up for the harm that our rivers and wildlife will suffer as a result. “Scrapping the rules may reduce the costs for big businesses, but those costs don’t disappear. Instead, the public will pick up the bill for pollution reduction, and the environment will bear an unbearable cost of yet more pollution in our most sensitive rivers and streams.” ----- Repeal of water pollution rules won’t solve England’s housing crisis, say developers Developers welcome end to rules but say amending levelling up bill risks months of delays Kiran Staceyand Helena Horton Rishi Sunak (right) and housing secretary, Michael Gove (centre) at the Taylor Wimpey Heather Gardens housing development in Norwich. Rishi Sunak (right) and housing secretary, Michael Gove (centre) at the Taylor Wimpey Heather Gardens housing development in Norwich. Photograph: WPA/Getty Images Michael Gove’s plan to repeal water pollution rules in an attempt to kickstart housebuilding will not solve England’s housing crisis, developers have warned, thanks to delays in implementation and other planning burdens. The housing secretary announced on Tuesday he intends to remove the regulations regarding nutrient levels in rivers, prompting outrage from green groups but relief from housebuilders, whose shares promptly rose. But while developers have campaigned for years for an end to the rules, they warned that amending the levelling up bill to do so risked months of delays given opposition to multiple parts of the expansive legislation. A spokesperson for the Home Builders Federation said: “After four years the proposals are a welcome step towards a solution, but clearly the bill still has some way to go and we are potentially many months from unlocking sites and starting construction work.” They added: “Whilst this ultimately may remove one major barrier to housing supply, it is no silver bullet and the government’s approach on planning remains an even greater constraint alongside mortgage availability in the current economic environment.” Gove said on Tuesday he would use the levelling up bill, which is being debated in the House of Lords, to remove rules blocking new development if it is forecast to add to levels of nutrients such as nitrates and phosphates in rivers. Those nutrients, which are contained in waste products, can cause algae and other plants to grow so quickly that they choke off aquatic life. However, housebuilders say the rules have been enforced so strictly by Natural England that it has become impossible to build on large parts of the country. The regulations have meant no houses being built in the past four years in large parts of the Solent and the Lake District for example. Under the new regime, developers will no longer have to offset the nutrient pollution caused by sewage from new homes. Instead, the government is spending an extra £140m to offset extra pollution, shifting the burden from the polluter to the taxpayer. Gove told BBC Radio 4’s PM programme: “After all the measures we’ve announced today have been enacted there will be fewer nutrients going into British rivers.” Richard Benwell, the chief executive of Wildlife and Countryside Link, said: “Scrapping the rules may reduce the costs for big businesses, but those costs don’t disappear. Instead, the public will pick up the bill for pollution reduction, and the environment will bear an unbearable cost of yet more pollution in our most sensitive rivers and streams.” Some Conservatives also expressed concern. Sam Hall, director of the Conservative Environment Network, said: “It is disappointing that the government has chosen to exempt housebuilding’s nutrient pollution from the habitats regulations, rather than seek a holistic reform with developers paying proportionally for their pollution.” Conservative MPs, however, were broadly supportive, including those who have opposed Gove over housebuilding in the past. Theresa Villiers, who has previously led rebellions against plans to liberalise the planning system, told the Guardian on Tuesday: “For a long time the nutrient neutrality rules have been operating in a very inflexible way, and have all but stopped development in a number of places.” Shares in major developers rose on Tuesday, with Persimmon, Taylor Wimpey, and Barratt Developments and Berkeley Group all performing well. Industry executives however warn however that Gove’s attempts to repeal the pollution regulations could still fail given the tortuous process behind passing the levelling up bill. Lords have debated dozens of amendments already, covering everything from education policy to electric vehicle charge points. The government also wants to use the bill to push forward new measures to allow councils top opt out of low-emissions zones such as London’s Ulez. “This bill has become a Christmas tree with various members using it to advance their chosen policies,” said one supporter of the move to repeal the nutrient neutrality rules. “The worry is now that it simply doesn’t pass in time.” If the bill is not passed in time for the King’s Speech in November, it will have to be reintroduced for the next session, where it will fight for legislative time with the rest of the government’s priorities for what is likely to be the final session before an election. And even if the bill does pass, officials admit it will be months before the pollution regulations are formally removed. |