Will MPs vote for nature as the UK Government’s Planning Bill heads back to the Commons?

In March 2025, the UK Government introduced the Planning and Infrastructure Bill. Their intention is that the Bill speeds up the delivery of new housing and infrastructure. As originally drafted, the Bill removed vital nature protections and threatened nature’s recovery. A threat heightened by those in the highest government offices repeatedly using false anti-nature rhetoric.  

As originally drafted, Part 3 of the Bill created Environmental Delivery Plans (EDPs) to allow multiple development impacts, and their required restoration measures, to be considered together over much larger areas at the same time. But it also removed many crucial safeguards vital for environmental protection. 

Thanks in no small part to successful campaigning, backed by many thousands of RSPB members and supporters, in July the UK Government announced a number of amendments to the Bill to address these concerns. However, we have always said further strengthening is needed. 

During the Bill’s passage through the House of Lords, there was a significant win for nature when Peers passed Baroness Willis’ amendment (previously known as 130, now renumbered as Amendment 40 for the Bill’s return to the Commons). This limits the use of EDPs to issues where landscape-scale approaches have been proven effective; like nutrient neutrality, water quality, and air quality – and not species. 

This supplemented an early success when the Bishop of Norwich’s amendment (previously known as 94, now renumbered as Amendment 38) to ensure the protection of chalk streams, was passed. 

Peers also proposed Amendment 148, which would have provided that essential strengthening for nature we have been calling for. During the debate the UK Government committed to work with Peers to ensure clarity on how EDPs will be deployed, and the amendment was withdrawn. 

Following discussions, the UK Government tabled its own amendment at Third Reading. Unfortunately it does not go as far as the original. However, it does provide some additional certainty by requiring the Secretary of State to prioritise the different ways any negative effects of a development subject to an EDP may be addressed (namely minimise, mitigate, and compensate for harm, in that order). 

Having supported Hannah Bourne-Taylor's campaign to make Swift bricks a legal requirement from the start, we shared her disappointment that Peers rejected an amendment that would have made them mandatory on all new brick-built homes. That vote means there will be no further opportunity to secure Swift bricks in this Bill. 

An amendment, which would have mandated the use of bird safe glass in new builds was withdrawn by Baroness Freeman after a positive statement from the UK Government that they would look at the possibility of targeted measures for commercial development. 

We supported her efforts to get the UK Government to bring forward its own amendment to that effect at Third Reading earlier this week, but unfortunately no amendment was tabled. 

The Bill now returns to the Commons on Thursday (13 November) so that MPs can scrutinise and vote on all the amendments passed by Peers; they can accept, reject, or revise any of these.  

We now need your help again to ensure MPs pass, unrevised, all those that ensure protection for nature.