Nature in planning

 In order to address provision the critical need to extend infrastructure and planning  government has brought forward the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, which I voted against at its Third Reading.

The reality of the planning system in our part of the country is that it simply isn’t fit for purpose. With the District Council’s footprint covered by 70% National Park and 5% National Landscape, the ambitious housing targets in our area are squeezed into just 25% of the available land.

This has led to high-density developments being built without the necessary infrastructure, leaving residents facing daily challenges: whether that’s navigating the congestion on the A27, finding local school places, or getting a GP appointment.

The Bill is developer-led, centralised, and fails to deliver vital infrastructure in transport, health, education and environmental services. Most worryingly, it fails to give communities any real stake in development.

The Government’s new housing targets risk forcing Chichester back to square one, handing more power to developers who have long been land-banking consents rather than delivering the homes we actually need. For example, Arun District Council — covering areas like Bersted and Pagham now has the highest housing target outside Greater London, despite being prone to repeated catastrophic flooding.

We need growth, but it must be thoughtful and sustainable  enabling young people to stay in the area they grew up in, buy homes, contribute to the local economy and keep our communities thriving for generations to come.

That requires joined-up thinking. The Liberal Democrats have long called for a Land Use Framework to help balance competing demands for land — between agriculture, housing, energy and nature restoration.

We are committed to reforming the planning system so that infrastructure comes first — especially to ensure that local water systems can cope. We also want to tackle the housing crisis without causing irreparable harm to our environment. That means raising minimum standards for new builds and investing in insulation.

Yet there was no mention of protecting the natural environment in this Bill. The Liberal Democrats have called for a nature Act, which would restore the natural environment by setting legally binding near- and long-term targets for improving water, air, soil and biodiversity, supported by at least £18 billion in funding over five years.

Alongside my Liberal Democrat colleague Gideon Amos, our planning spokesperson, I tabled an amendment to the Bill which would give National Landscapes , including Chichester Harbour, statutory consultee status, so they are formally consulted on any planning proposals impacting their area. Gideon brought this amendment to a vote at Committee stage, and I re-tabled it again at Report Stage. On both occasions, the Government and Conservative MPs declined to support it.

The Liberal Democrats remain deeply concerned about the missed opportunities in this Bill, particularly on nature recovery, climate resilience, social housing, and building standards. We’re calling for real commitments: upfront funding for the nature Recovery Levy, mandatory nature-friendly building standards, zero-carbon homes, and clear social housing targets.

All of these reasons are why I voted against the Bill. If you’d like, you can watch my speech on the matter [here].