Freshwater Habitats Trust response to Government amendments to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill
28th July 2025
Since the Planning and Infrastructure Bill was introduced in March, we’ve worked with colleagues across the environment sector, pushing for improvements to the Bill’s nature protections. The Government has now tabled several amendments to Part 3 of the Planning and Infrastructure Bill. Whilst these amendments have plugged some of the gaping holes in the Bill, they don’t go far enough.
A step backwards for nature
Like others, we have become increasingly concerned that Environmental Delivery Plans (EDPs) will ultimately result in significant environmental loss.
The Government claims that new provisions will protect the ‘coherence’ of the protected site network, but there’s no denying that the Bill removes protection for our best nature sites. Sites of Special Scientific Interest and Special Areas of Conservation, with their rare and sensitive habitats and species, could be built on under the EDP system.
In reality, the safeguards in the Bill are weak. The Secretary of State for Housing will be the ultimate decision-maker, and the EDP system could be abused to enable development on protected nature sites, without Parliamentary scrutiny.
Environmental NGOs have been particularly concerned about the Bill’s effect on ‘Irreplaceable Habitats’ – places like ancient woodlands and lowland fens, which are especially vulnerable to destruction because they are essentially impossible to recreate. The Government’s statement accompanying the amendments says that Irreplaceable Habitats are implicitly protected by the Bill’s ‘overall improvement test’. We dispute this: without explicit protection in the Bill itself, Irreplaceable Habitats will remain at risk, because the National Planning Policy Framework (which currently protects Irreplaceable Habitats) can be amended at will by Government.
Just as concerning, there are many other exceptionally important habitats, not currently listed as Irreplaceable, that are just as vulnerable in reality. For example, ancient ice age ponds with their extraordinary communities of plants and animals, raised bogs which can take thousands of years to develop, and species-rich meadows on soils that have remained undisturbed for centuries. All of these could now be destroyed, based on the unsubstantiated assertion that they can be replaced elsewhere.
- A Pingo Pond formed in the last ice age at Thompson Common - Norfolk Brecks.
As it stands, the Bill undermines the protection of our rarest habitats and species and is an open door to irreversible environmental damage. To address this threat, Government should explicitly exclude Irreplaceable Habitats from EDPs, and publish a comprehensive list of these habitats. Further, Government should rule out development on designated nature sites, to protect those habitats which do not meet the definition of irreplaceability, but which nonetheless are nationally important for wildlife – and extremely difficult to replace.
These are not ‘wrecking amendments’, and would not undermine the stated purpose of Part 3. EDPs could still be used to enable strategic approaches to species licensing, and address diffuse impacts on protected sites. Importantly, these amendments would ensure that EDPs could not be abused to enable the destruction of our best nature sites.
A threat to what’s working
The Government’s amendments also do little to address an important specific issue with Part 3, which we’ve been highlighting since the Bill’s introduction.
This is the risk that successful conservation schemes could be lost when the Bill is passed. Strategic, joined-up approaches to addressing the impact of development on nature – the kind of thing the Bill is supposed to champion – are already happening. And these schemes risk being crushed in the rollout of EDPs.
This Government is nominally committed to expanding the role of the private sector in nature recovery. At the time of writing, they’re in the middle of a consultation on how best to do this. But the proposals in Part 3 of the Bill pose a very real risk of steamrollering key nature markets just as they’re beginning to gather momentum.
We declare an interest here: with our partners Amphibian and Reptile Conservation and Newt Conservation Partnership, we’ve seen firsthand the massive benefits that the NatureSpace District Licensing NatureSpace District Licensing Scheme has brought forward – for newts and for freshwater wildlife as a whole. Creating four new clean water ponds for every one lost to development, and at no cost to the taxpayer, the scheme has boosted populations of Great Crested Newts whilst providing habitat for a host of other aquatic species. Rare and sensitive wetland plant species have been recorded frequently in and around the clean water ponds we create – a testament to their quality.
On this point, we have a simple request: assurances from government that existing, successful strategic schemes will not be lost as the EDP system is implemented – and that the door will be kept open to the development of similar schemes in future. A cast-iron guarantee that these can continue to operate would help to re-establish market confidence, and enable new private/third-sector schemes – many of which are already in development – to be brought into reality, and start delivering for nature.
- One of the four ponds created by the Newt Conservation Partnership in 2020. These ponds already support breeding populations of Great Crested Newt and Common Toad, both priority species.
A silver lining for ponds
Amidst the threats posed to nature by the Planning and Infrastructure Bill is a concrete opportunity to promote nature recovery. This is amendment 341 to the Bill, tabled by Baroness Coffey, which would remove the requirement for planning permission when creating ponds of less than 1 hectare in area.
Since the 19th century, more than half of Britain’s ponds have been lost. Conservation organisations and land managers are hard at work in reversing this loss by creating new ponds across Britain’s landscapes. A permitted development right for pond creation would help to accelerate this work, ensuring that conservation resources are spent on practical action for nature recovery – not on navigating the planning system.
We supported a similar amendment in the House of Commons, and we’re now busy preparing a briefing for the House of Lords, to encourage as many Peers as possible to support the amendment in Committee Stage. With growing support from other environmental NGOs, we’re hopeful that we can get this important change accepted into the Bill.
Changes that are urgently needed
The Bill remains a threat to nature. In the Lords Committee Stage, we urge the Lords to consider the following amendments:
- Explicitly exclude Irreplaceable Habitats from EDPs.
- Extend the Irreplaceable Habitats list to include the additional habitats already recommended by Natural England.
- Explicitly exclude protected nature sites (Sites of Special Scientific Interest, Special Areas of Conservation, Special Protection Areas) from development under the EDP system.
- Provide protection against the loss of existing successful strategic schemes as EDPs are rolled out.
- Create a permitted development right for wildlife ponds, to reduce the cost of pond creation and accelerate nature recovery.