- News
- legislation
- Wage war on nature to build new homes: that’s Labour’s offer, but it’s a con trick | George Monbiot
Wage war on nature to build new homes: that’s Labour’s offer, but it’s a con trick | George Monbiot
The government’s new planning bill represents a profound and calculated assault on our natural heritage, systematically dismantling environmental protections under the guise of progress, a strategy that this nation of self-professed nature lovers should find morally and ecologically untenable. At the heart of this offensive lies what can only be described as a 'cauldron principle,' a cynical political maneuver that deliberately targets species easily cast as villains—creatures like bats, newts, snails, and spiders, those you might indeed find bubbling in a witch’s brew—while conspicuously avoiding blame on widely cherished animals such as dormice, otters, water voles, nightingales, turtle doves, or orchids.This is not an accident of policy but a deliberate framing, a way to manufacture public consent for habitat destruction by presenting these ecologically vital but less charismatic creatures as malevolent obstacles to national prosperity. The historical precedent for this is stark; bats and newts have been the scapegoats for successive governments, with Boris Johnson’s administration famously blaming them for 'nastily standing in the way' of economic growth, a narrative now being wholeheartedly adopted by the current Labour leadership.In a telling moment this past March, Keir Starmer himself pointed a finger at 'jumping spiders' as the singular reason an entire new town was halted, defensively adding, 'I’ve not made that example up,' a statement that reveals more about the fragility of the argument than the strength of the evidence. This rhetorical strategy is a con trick of the highest order, one that ignores the complex, interconnected web of life these species support and the irreversible consequences of their loss.From an ecological standpoint, bats are critical for pest control, pollinating plants, and dispersing seeds, while newts serve as vital indicators of wetland health; their decline signals a much broader environmental collapse that no number of new homes can compensate for. The broader context here is a global biodiversity crisis, with the UK already ranking as one of the most nature-depleted countries on Earth, having lost nearly half of its biodiversity since the Industrial Revolution, according to a 2023 State of Nature report.To further accelerate this decline under the banner of development is not just short-sighted but actively self-destructive, trading long-term ecological stability for short-term political and developer gains. Expert commentary from organizations like the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds and The Wildlife Trusts consistently highlights that sustainable development is entirely possible without such drastic rollbacks, through mechanisms like robust environmental impact assessments, biodiversity net gain mandates, and strategic brownfield site development, options this bill seems intent on bypassing.The possible consequences are dire: fragmented habitats leading to local extinctions, degraded ecosystem services like water purification and flood mitigation that cost billions to replace with engineered solutions, and a profound disconnection of future generations from the natural world. This isn't merely a planning dispute; it's a fundamental clash of values, pitting a narrow, GDP-obsessed definition of growth against the intrinsic value of a living, breathing planet.The narrative that environmental protections are the primary barrier to housing is a false dichotomy, a manufactured crisis that ignores the vast tracts of land already with planning permission lying undeveloped by speculative builders, the systemic issues of land banking, and the lack of investment in truly affordable, sustainable social housing. By framing the debate around spiders and newts, the government deflects from these more complex, politically challenging economic drivers.The analytical insight is clear: this is a power play, a transfer of control from public safeguarding to private profit, wrapped in the language of necessity. The emotional storytelling of a country losing its natural soul is not hyperbole; it is the documented reality of hedgerows ripped out, ancient woodlands cleared, and rivers polluted, all for developments that often fail to meet the actual needs of communities.As a biologist who has witnessed the quiet devastation of habitat loss firsthand, this policy feels like a betrayal of our collective responsibility as stewards of the land. The path forward requires not capitulation to this war on nature, but a vigorous, informed public resistance that demands a development model which builds homes *with* nature, not upon its grave.
JA
Jamie Lowe123k11 hours ago
wait so they're seriously blaming spiders now idk this feels like such a distraction tbh
0
JA
Jamie Lowe123k15 hours ago
ah yes the classic 'blame the spiders' strategy, a timeless political move tbh i'm shocked they didn't throw in some newts for good measure smh
0