KOR responds to the U-turn on nutrient neutrality rules

How do you meet the demands of a growing population, providing enough houses to put a roof over everyone’s head, while at the same time cleaning up our rivers and making more space for wildlife?

It’s a tricky one to pull-off and Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Michael Gove, looks as if he has given up trying to please both the environmental campaigners and those pressing for a boost in house building.  He decided this week that the catchily-named ‘nutrient neutrality rules’ – blamed for thwarting housebuilding in favour of cleaner rivers - have got to go.

Those EU-inspired regulations, introduced when the UK was still in the European Union in 2017, means local authorities in certain protected areas were told to refuse planning permission for developments if they risked adding nutrients like phosphates and nitrates to watercourses, causing a build-up of algae and other nasties.

Developers say the rules prevented the construction of up to 120,000 homes. Clean river campaigners say they prevented the UK’s already polluted water courses from getting even worse.

This should not be an either/or argument.  We should, with the right investment, be able to build the homes needed, where they are needed without trashing the environment.

But hard-and-fast rules, like the nutrient neutrality regulations, are seldom a good idea where there are a number of variables in play.  Giving local authorities a bit of leeway on how the nutrient neutrality rules are applied, as Michael Gove appears to be planning, ought to free up sites for vital housebuilding.

The Secretary of State acknowledges, in his announcement, that housebuilding is a very modest contributor to pollution in our water courses. The Government has promised to offset any possible impact on river quality through more housebuilding by expanding investment in and evolving the Nutrient Mitigation Scheme run by Natural England. It said it will double investment in the scheme to £280m, sufficient, it insists, to offset the very small amount of additional nutrient discharge attributable to up to 100,000 homes between now and 2030. 

But, be warned, the environmental campaigners are going to be watching local councils and the housebuilders to whom they grant permission, extremely closely.  Developers who get the opportunity to build on sites previously declared off-limits because of fears the project would damage nearby water courses will need to make sure they can justify what they are doing and demonstrate that the benefits for a community – providing much needed homes – outweigh any environmental costs.

As is so often the case with issues like this, getting the messaging right, engaging with the community and being open, honest and ready to answer questions will be crucial.   Professional communications will be key for developers and housebuilders keen to develop sites that had previously been seen as off-limits.

Nothing is going to change overnight.  Nutrient neutrality rules are part of the legally-binding Conservation Regulations 2017 and it will need parliamentary approval to change them.

Labour, which has already declared itself supporting “the builders, not the blockers” to achieve UK housing targets might find it hard to oppose Michael Gove’s U-turn.

But be sure plenty of others are lining up to take issue with this change including major players in the powerful environmental lobby.  Housebuilders need to make sure they are able to counter those arguments, and provide the homes people need, where they are required.