Jonathan Essex, Green Party councillor for Redhill East, is among the most vocal about the threat. He’s worried about how Planning and Infrastructure Bill might reshape the land use. He argued that if passed in its current form, the legislation could “dismantle decades of progress in nature protection.” Essex’s concerns reflect broader worries about the bill’s implications for environmental conservation efforts.
At a meeting last week, Essex himself moved a motion urging the government to rethink problematic provisions inside that bill. From the outset, the Surrey County Council (SCC) was unanimous in backing his motion. This vote highlighted the deep bipartisan – yes, bipartisan – unease they had with the FTA’s plans. Essex slammed highly specific provisions in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill. He called them “the most profoundly destructive infrastructure change” to local fauna and decades of established conservation efforts.
Essex played up the idea that the bill would dismantle years of bad groundwork intended to really protect ecosystems. His motion aims to safeguard well-established environmental protections. It is a measure of his commitment that his desire to make sure these important measures are included in development projects.
“This bill could dismantle decades of progress in nature protection.” – Jonathan Essex
A spokesperson for the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government responded to Essex’s claims. In doing so, they admitted that something was wrong with the planning system as it stands today. They stated, “The government has inherited a failing system that has delayed new homes and infrastructure while doing nothing for nature’s recovery.” The spokesperson continued, “There’s no doubt we need to do better,” confident sign that the government does indeed intend to overhaul planning processes.
In the spokesperson’s words, … the Planning and Infrastructure Bill is about facilitating economic growth. At the same time, it allows star power to help it strengthen environmental protections. They stated, “Our Planning and Infrastructure Bill will deliver a win-win for the economy and nature by unblocking building and economic growth and delivering meaningful environmental improvements.”
Despite the government’s assurances, Essex remains skeptical about the balance between development and environmental preservation. His motion’s unanimous support from SCC indicates that his fears are common among local leaders.
