We Yorkies always say that we live in God’s own County. The very land we inhabit is central to our identity.
Certainly, Yorkshire is a beautiful part of the world, with our green fields, rolling hills and dazzling rivers. The constituency of Hemsworth, in West Yorkshire, that I am proud to represent, is home to ancient woodland and a number of rare and endangered bird and animal species. These treasures have been preserved by generation after generation, who have acted as custodians of our natural world.
But, in a striking phrase, the general secretary of the United Nations, has said that “Humanity is becoming a weapon of mass extinction”. There is a danger that, sitting in our homes here in the north of England, we might fool ourselves into believing that environmental destruction and the threat to our planet’s wildlife lies elsewhere in the world – in the Amazon, for example.
It is a mistake to make this assumption. Every one of us has a duty to look after our environment for our children, grandchildren and future generations. After all, once it’s gone, it’s gone for good. I know that my constituents feel the same way.
Losing green belt land
Here in our county the environment is under threat. You only need to look at the current proposals for my own council area of Wakefield. The local plan foisted on Wakefield Council by Westminster risks reducing the green belt in the district by 2% at a single stroke, largely in order to build additional houses.
This is despite the fact that, according to the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England, there are 115,000 potential brownfield sites in Yorkshire alone, which could be built on instead. Tens of thousands more such sites are land-banked, with planning consent already given for housing, but the houses remain unbuilt.
I have been an outspoken critic of proposals to build on green belt land in my constituency. Here is a case of developers wanting to put 2,000 houses on a beautiful part of the countryside that includes ancient woodland. I feared this development would pose a serious threat to rare species of flora and fauna, but discovered to my surprise there had been no ecological survey completed by the developers.
So, I commissioned an ecological survey myself. The results were astonishing. It turned out that the site was home to 16 different species of birds with ‘red’ status such as lapwings, greenfinches and skylarks, meaning they are of high conservation concern, as well as 10 different species of mammals with protected status under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 such as water voles, pipistrelles and whiskered bats.
A damaging lack of oversight
It is extremely concerning that the developers themselves were not required to commission an independent ecological survey and that the responsibility fell to a third party. It left me wondering, how many other developments are being built on land that is home to precious endangered species without oversight? By turning our backs on the details, we ourselves are in danger of contributing to the crisis.
The destruction of habitats like these is causing untold damage to our planet. Every extinction has a knock-on impact on the wider ecosystem and causes escalating levels of environmental destruction. This plays a significant role in climate breakdown.
Earlier this year I submitted a series of amendments in the House of Commons to the levelling-up bill. I sought to make it a law which would prevent building on areas with vulnerable and endangered species and ancient woodland. This included a block on any developments where an ecological survey showed the area was home to protected species.
From coalmine to country park
Aside from environmental issues, there are other important reasons why building on our green belt can have damaging social consequences.
My area is home to a number of former pit villages. Coal mining formed the bedrock of our local community for centuries until the pits were closed in the 1980s and 1990s.
Now some of the former colliery sites that were left abandoned have been turned into country parks. In Fitzwilliam, for example, the community came together and with the support of the Labour council established a lovely park that is open for anyone to enjoy.
Many former miners suffer from lung problems as a result of their time down the pits. With such high levels of air pollution in our modern world, our countryside and parks are an important lifeline for those with breathing difficulties. In my view, beautiful green spaces and fresh air should be accessible to all social classes, not just the wealthy, as is too often the case.
Losing green space to not-so-affordable housing
Of course, there is an urgent need for housing, but what is built needs to be affordable, accessible and supported by well-resourced public services. Instead, what we have is a housing market led by developers whose primary purpose is profit maximisation rather than social and environmental protection.
In too many cases where a green belt development is approved, we end up with a few thousand more houses of questionable affordability for local people, but we lose rare wildlife and a much-loved green space formerly used by local residents. The environmental and social cost is far too high.
In my view, the blame lies in Westminster. Successive governments have not taken environmental protection or climate change seriously. They have created an economy where big corporations amass huge power and the state takes a back seat. Corporations are encouraged to pursue ‘profit at all costs’ with minimal democratic checks and balances.
Shifting the balance of power
The belief that what is ‘good for business’ is always ‘good for society’ as a whole is a dangerous and destructive ideology. In truth, often what turns a profit has negative consequences for people and the planet. Building on green belt land is usually cheaper for developers than building on brownfield land, but it’s more destructive to our environment.
To address the causes of environmental destruction we need to fundamentally shift the balance of power within our economy. Rather than ripping up our environmental protection rules as this government is doing, we need to beef them up. We need more democracy and devolution, so that councils are empowered to stand up to powerful developers. Local people must have a real say over the decisions that shape their lives.
New housing should only be constructed with the consent of local communities. The final decision over house-building – especially proposals to build on green belt land – should be taken by local authorities.
I firmly believe that the surest way to protect our natural world is to empower the citizens who inhabit it. Strong devolved democratic institutions can help shift the balance of power from corporations to citizens. These are the principles that I fight for in Westminster.
