The plans to ditch the rules had been criticised by some green groups, who argued that the regulation was key to protecting the environment. But Sam Hall, director of the Conservative Environment Network felt that changes to these rules were necessary as the current set-up can be a “real hold up” on housebuilding in some areas. He told PoliticsHome the government now needed to “find alternative ways of achieving this change that carries wider support”.
Hall felt that housebuilding was only a “small contributor” to river pollution.
“I think the government was right to look for a solution and I also think they were right in their package to focus on the other bigger contributors to river pollution, such as farming and water firms,” he explained.
“The legal mechanism wasn’t necessarily the one I would have gone for but I think they were right to act. Keeping housebuilders within scope of habitats regulations, by requiring them to pay towards the mitigation in order to free up new homes, may have addressed some of the concerns and eased the burden on the taxpayer.
“I do think there is an opportunity given last night’s result in the Lords to find alternative ways of achieving this change that carries wider support and that effectively improves rivers and boost housebuilding.”