Environmental groups threaten Labour with legal action over potential weakening of wildlife protections

Environmental organisations have warned they could take the Government to court if Chancellor Rachel Reeves presses ahead with plans to scale back regulations protecting species such as bats and newts from construction projects.

Ms Reeves is understood to be considering reforms aimed at making it harder for environmental concerns to slow or block large-scale developments.

The Chancellor has argued that restrictive rules have become a “barrier” to investment. However, conservation groups have said weakening protections would be unlawful and counterproductive.

Richard Benwell, chief executive of Wildlife and Countryside Link, which represents more than 80 environmental and animal welfare organisations, said:

“It would be absurd for the Treasury to roll back basic environmental protections when flooding, wildfires, drought and crop failures are already costing the economy as much as £70bn this decade. Investing in nature is not only the right thing to do, it is also the wiser economic strategy.

“The Government is legally obliged to halt the decline of species by 2030 and weakening protections for wildlife could make it impossible to meet that duty. We will hold the Government to account on delivery – including through Parliament and, if necessary, legal action.”

Paul Miner, head of planning and policy at countryside charity CPRE, said delays to projects such as HS2 were caused more by ministerial indecision and a lack of open public debate than by wildlife protections.

“They’re taking the wrong route by saying that nature and public involvement are the main reasons why we’re not getting infrastructure projects off the ground, whereas the real reasons are very different,” he said, adding that the CPRE and its partners in the Better Planning Coalition would “look at legal routes” if concerns were not addressed in Parliament.

Craig Bennett, chief executive of The Wildlife Trusts, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that protections for bats and newts accounted for just 3% of planning appeal decisions. He said the Chancellor’s reported measures represented “environmental regression”.

According to reports, Ms Reeves has asked officials to draw up a reduced, UK-specific list of species to be safeguarded, potentially excluding animals such as newts. She is also considering scrapping the precautionary principle — which requires developers to prove that projects will not damage protected sites — and introducing tighter limits on judicial reviews that can delay construction.

The proposals are said to go beyond measures in the Government’s planning and infrastructure bill, which seeks to speed up development by overriding certain environmental requirements, including rules obliging developers to contribute to habitat restoration.

Earlier this year, Ms Reeves told peers she cared “more about the young family getting on the housing ladder than I do about protecting some snails.” She has also promised to use the autumn Budget to boost productivity through investment in infrastructure and planning reform.

Beccy Speight, chief executive of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, said: “Doubling down on unsound proposals would not be in the best interests of anyone. Our natural infrastructure is as vital as our built infrastructure for us all.”