HBF welcomes ‘more pragmatic’ approach to nutrient neutrality as Labour commits to reform

The Home Builders’ Federation (HBF) has said it would “welcome a more pragmatic” approach to nutrient neutrality after the new Labour government signalled its intention to change the rules.

Nutrient neutrality rules are intended to ensure that new land development does not increase the level of phosphates and nitrates entering vulnerable watercourses.

But the HBF has previously estimated that the policy has held up building nearly 100,000 homes and claims the rules wrongly blame developers for water pollution.

Last year, while the party was in opposition, Labour peers blocked the Conservative government’s attempt to reform nutrient rules through an amendment to the Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill. 

However, the party has now indicated it is open to reform on its own terms. 

The environment secretary Steve Reed and housing secretary Angela Rayner sent a letter to environmental groups at the weekend telling them that “the status quo is not working” - referring to nature protections in the planning system. 

A government spokesperson subsequently told Housing Today that it would “implement solutions to unlock the building of homes affected by nutrient neutrality without weakening environmental protections”.

“What we’re talking about here is really a mitigation compared to what needs to be done to protect the environment into the long term, which is about investment in waste water treatment, to be thinking much more about green infrastructure, and to be thinking at landscape scale,” they said.

>> Read more: Nutrients solution ‘cannot be at the expense of the environment’, says Labour

“This can be done. It requires some political leadership, and happily we have that set out from the secretaries of state for DEFRA and MHCLG.”

Responding to the government’s new approach on nutrient rules, Steve Turner, executive director at the HBF, said housebuilders would “welcome a more pragmatic approach by government and its agencies that would deliver better outcomes for housing supply and the environment”. “Natural England’s advice on nutrient and water neutrality and recreational impact has resulted in five years of delays to housebuilding, stalling the delivery of some 160,000 homes,” they said. 

“As has long been recognised, delivering new homes has a minimal impact on nutrient levels and the ban has done nothing to improve river quality, but has had a devastating impact on the supply of new homes. 

“While we await details of an alternative approach, the critical issue is likely to be how quickly land for mitigation can be assembled and schemes become operational in each of the 27 catchments affected.”

Labour’s approach to the problem has also been welcomed by the chair of Natural England, Tony Juniper, who said on the Today programme yesterday that he supported changes to the “delivery pathway” of nutrient neutrality rules.

“If we are serious about achieving nature recovery, we can’t diminish the protections. But what we can do is achieve those protections and go beyond them in ways that are quicker and more efficient,” he said.

“Hitherto we’ve been looking at individual developments, trying to mitigate for those whereas if we look at the entire catchment, the levels of pollution going into the rivers and wetlands from all sources, we can get a much better handle on what needs to be done.”