Angela Rayner says newts can't be more protected than people who need housing
8 December 2024, 09:11 | Updated: 8 December 2024, 10:17
Protecting wildlife shouldn't come at the expense of building more homes, Angela Rayner has said.
Last week, Sir Keir Starmer pledged to build 1.5 million homes and fast-track planning decisions on 150 major infrastructure projects by the end of the decade.
Ms Rayner, who is deputy prime minister and housing secretary, was asked if this meant fewer protections for wildlife like newts, bats, and kittiwakes.
Politics latest: Rayner welcomes 'fall' of Assad
The Labour minister told Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips she thinks "we can look after them, but at the same time not stop building".
"We can't have a situation where newts are more protected than people who desperately need housing," she said.
"What we need is a process which says 'protect nature and wildlife, but not at the expense of us building the houses'.
"We could do both."
'This government will not accept this nonsense'
Critics have suggested the government's housing target is unrealistic, but Ms Rayner told Sky News she "cannot accept the situation as it stands currently".
The questions arose following Sir Keir's criticism of a £100m bat tunnel. Last month, the head of HS2 revealed the structure was one of the many issues the massively over-budget rail project had encountered.
The prime minister said last week: "We haven't built a reservoir for over 30 years and even the projects we do approve are fought tooth and nail, nail and tooth, until you end up with the absurd spectacle of a £100m bat tunnel holding up the country's single biggest infrastructure project.
"Driving up taxes and the cost of living beyond belief.
"I tell you now: this government will not accept this nonsense any more."
Read more:
Will Starmer's reforms be fast enough for voters?
M&S; wins planning fight to rebuild flagship London store
Ms Rayner was also pushed on what would happen if councils did not provide enough housing to meet the government's targets.
While she would not give a clear answer, Ms Rayner appeared to say councils would be forced to comply.
On six occasions, Trevor Phillips asked her what would happen if councils did not build enough houses.
Ms Rayner said Trevor was "missing the point" - and that plans would be "compulsory" under Labour's National Planning Policy Framework.
She went on to suggest the government could take over or impose housing on local authorities.
