Hansard·Lords Chamber·Vol. 840

Biodiversity Net Gain

Wednesday, 6 November 2024

28 contributions9 members

Contributions

  1. Question

    View contribution permalink →

  2. Asked by

    View contribution permalink →

  3. Baroness Parminter

    To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the effectiveness of the implementation of the biodiversity net gain provisions.

    View contribution permalink →

  4. The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Baroness Hayman of Ullock) (Lab)

    My Lords, it is almost nine months since biodiversity net gain became mandatory for most developments. We are pleased to see stakeholders embracing this opportunity to deliver much-needed development while improving the environment at the same time. Officials are monitoring implementation closely and engaging with sectors, including developers and local authorities. We have updated guidance to provide clarification on areas of concern and will continue to refine the policy to ensure that it achieves intended outcomes.

    View contribution permalink →

  5. Baroness Parminter (LD)

    I thank the Minister for her reply. She may know that analysis has shown that only 7% of planning applications are identifying a need for biodiversity net gain, which is massively lower than all of us, including the Government, expected. I am very pleased to hear that officials are monitoring the situation, but will they be reviewing the exceptions, some of which are proving to be rather large loopholes, to ensure that biodiversity net gain builds nature’s recovery and the sustainable homes that we need?

    View contribution permalink →

  6. Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)

    The noble Baroness is referring, I assume, to the exemptions in place for applications that have no or a very limited impact on biodiversity. That was brought in to ensure proportionality and to keep the planning system moving. However, Defra is working with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government to review planning statistics and specific applications.

    View contribution permalink →

  7. Lord Cromwell (CB)

    My Lords, I am currently involved in negotiating with a developer on biodiversity net gain. This involves boxes of huge and very expensive files, which have to be redone every time Defra changes the metric and locks the land into a commitment of 30-plus years. The developers tell me that their traditional landscaping required under planning often exceeded what is required under biodiversity net gain. Can the Minister give us any data on what real net gain is being achieved?

    View contribution permalink →

  8. Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)

    Clearly, this is still fairly new for planning applications. It came in only eight months ago, so we are considering how we move forward. I do not have data on that to hand, and I am not sure we would have it available at present, as it has been only about eight months, but I will check and get back to the noble Lord.

    View contribution permalink →

  9. The Earl of Courtown (Con)

    My Lords, the last Government improved biodiversity monitoring, setting targets to prevent species loss and create half a million hectares of habitat by 2042. Given the important role nature-based solutions play in improving biodiversity, can the Minister confirm that the Government will encourage the use of such solutions to tackle pollution from our water sector?

    View contribution permalink →

  10. Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)

    The noble Earl makes an extremely important point. Of course, it is very important that we use nature-based solutions to tackle all kinds of pollution, not only water-based ones. We are very keen to see such solutions implemented.

    View contribution permalink →

  11. Lord Teverson (LD)

    My Lords, the Government inherited in their departmental diary a provisional date of November 2025 by which to include biodiversity net gain for nationally significant infrastructure projects. Will the Minister confirm that they will go ahead with that on that date? I encourage them to do so.

    View contribution permalink →

  12. Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)

    I can confirm that we are planning to consult very shortly on applying biodiversity net gain to nationally significant infrastructure projects—NSIPs—without any broad exceptions.

    View contribution permalink →

  13. Baroness Boycott (CB)

    My Lords, in all the planning applications in the biodiversity net gain provisions, are the Government paying attention to the importance of corridors that allow nature to travel between different building sites? Otherwise, it gets too isolated and dies off.

    View contribution permalink →

  14. Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)

    The noble Baroness is right—corridors for wildlife are incredibly important. Many developments have to give due regard to removing hedgerows, for example, in order that they do not stop routes for wildlife such as dormice. It is extremely important and, on all developments, Defra is working with MHCLG to ensure that the environment is taken into full consideration.

    View contribution permalink →

  15. Lord Fox (LD)

    The Minister has spoken about biodiversity and infrastructure projects. How about marine biodiversity? Can the Minister set out the Government’s position on enhancing the regaining of marine biodiversity?

    View contribution permalink →

  16. Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)

    I am sure the noble Lord is aware that restoring marine biodiversity is very complicated. In many ways, it is more complex than restoring biodiversity on land; it is a very challenging subject. Clearly, we need to look at the marine conservation zones to see what they can do, and to work internationally on this because it is a broad international area. The Government are reviewing this at the moment.

    View contribution permalink →

  17. Lord Fuller (Con)

    My Lords, last harvest, the UK’s wheat production fell by 30%—from 14 million to 10 million tonnes. One of the reasons was that so much land had been taken out of production for environmental schemes. We have heard that land for BNG must be locked away for 30 years. What assessment has been made of the long-term impact on our food security of locking land away for a generation, making it unavailable for food production?

    View contribution permalink →

  18. Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)

    I suggest that the noble Lord looks in detail at our land use frame- work when we put it out for consultation shortly. That is one of the things we want to look at, and it is why we are doing the framework: we need to balance our need to produce food against environmental considerations—where we plant our trees, build our houses, and so forth. I look forward to a good debate on that subject.

    View contribution permalink →

  19. Baroness Boycott (CB)

    My Lords, is the Minister going to ban bottom trawling in marine protected areas?

    View contribution permalink →

  20. Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)

    We are looking at bottom trawling at a site-specific level because there are different challenges in different areas. As I said, marine conservation is complex and has to take many things into account. There is quite a lot going on in this area and, if the noble Baroness wants to know the details, I am happy to send them to her or to meet to discuss this further.

    View contribution permalink →

  21. Baroness Redfern (Con)

    My Lords, in the light of the implementation of the biodiversity net gain provision, and given the need to ensure that assessments are done by competent people and that landowners are paid a fair price for their credits, so that they can deliver on their commitments, how are His Majesty’s Government ensuring that the LPAs are equipped to handle the additional burden on their planning officers, and will additional planning officers need to be recruited?

    View contribution permalink →

  22. Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)

    Yes, the Government have committed over £35 million in ring-fenced funding to local planning authorities to help them prepare for and implement biodiversity net gain. We have confirmed funding up to the end of next year and further funding will be in the next review.

    View contribution permalink →

  23. Lord Cromwell (CB)

    As we have some time left, may I ask the Minister to look into why farmers in the higher-level environmental protection scheme—the HLS—are being excluded from joining the SFI scheme, both of which she will be familiar with? I have been asking Defra for months why Ministers are not being advised of this discriminatory approach and I have yet to receive an answer.

    View contribution permalink →

  24. Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)

    I am happy to go back to the department on this. We are going to open up the high-level applications next year, as I am sure the noble Lord is aware, and we are also looking at what we do with the legacy payments. I am happy to discuss this issue with him further, because we are making quite a lot of decisions on how we move forward.

    View contribution permalink →

  25. Lord Teverson (LD)

    My Lords, is not the answer to the question from the noble Lord on the Conservative Benches that if we do not have biodiversity and nature recovery, we will not have an agriculture industry in 30 years’ time?

    View contribution permalink →

  26. Baroness Hayman of Ullock (Lab)

    It is really important that we get the right balance between food production and environmental considerations. It is an important thing for any Government to take forward, and we are taking it very seriously. That is partly why we are doing the land use framework—to ensure that we deliver properly on both areas.

    View contribution permalink →

Source: UK Parliament Hansard API. Debate ID: 4756197.

Partner sites