📢 The UK’s new Planning and Infrastructure Bill (published today March 11th) introduces a radical shift in environmental regulation, one that could fundamentally change how ecological consultants like us operate.
I have spent most of the afternoon reading, re-reading, looking at responses online AND questioning Chat GPT (as it is smarter than me and I can’t afford a good lawyer!).
At the heart of the bill are Environmental Delivery Plans (EDPs) and the Nature Restoration Levy (NRL), which could allow developers to bypass site-specific protected species surveys by making financial contributions to a central fund.
What’s Changing?
Currently, developers must conduct Preliminary Ecological Appraisals (PEAs), Protected Species Surveys (PSSs), and Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) assessments to meet planning requirements.
Under the new system: ✅ If an EDP identifies a protected species on a site, and the developer pays into the Nature Restoration Levy, they are automatically granted a species licence. ✅ If an EDP identifies a protected feature of a European site, Ramsar site, or SSSI, and the developer pays the levy, the environmental impact of the development is disregarded.
This raises serious questions about how ecological constraints will be handled in future developments.
Our Key Concerns At ROAVR.
⚠️ Who decides what’s in an EDP? The bill is vague on how species and habitats are scoped into EDPs. If key features are left out, will developers still need site-specific assessments, or will these become a thing of the past?
⚠️ Is this a ‘pay-to-destroy’ scheme? Current legislation requires the mitigation hierarchy (avoid, mitigate, compensate). But this bill allows developers to sidestep on-site mitigation by paying into a central pot. Could this mean more habitat destruction without local compensation?
⚠️ Are Local Planning Authorities losing control? Can an LPA still require site-specific surveys if a development falls under an EDP? Or will they be forced to accept a one-size-fits-all assessment?
⚠️ Does Natural England have the resources to manage this? With severe underfunding and stretched capacity, can Natural England realistically update, enforce, and challenge EDPs? Or will this create a rubber-stamping process with no real oversight?
What This Means for Ecological Consultants
🔄 A shift from surveys to strategy. Consultants may have to eventually move from conducting site assessments to advising developers on how to navigate EDPs and NRL contributions. Sounds fun huh?!
🔎 The need for independent verification. If EDPs are based on outdated or poor data, consultants will need to challenge inaccurate assessments and provide updated ecological insights.
🏗️ Developers will still need expertise. Even if the NRL allows for exemptions, developers will need expert guidance on how to ensure compliance and avoid costly legal challenges.
What Happens Next?
Right now, nothing changes immediately as far as I can see, PEAs, PRAs, and BNG assessments remain part of planning. But as EDPs are rolled out, we could see a dramatic shift in how ecological constraints are assessed.
👉 What do you think? Is this a smart streamlining of environmental law, or are we heading towards a dangerous dilution of ecological protections?
Will this change your business plans for 2025 or is it business as usual. Food for thought in this office for the rest of the week!
#Ecology #Planning #InfrastructureBill #Biodiversity #EnvironmentalConsulting #ProtectedSpecies