Britain’s largest conservation charity has warned the government’s push to build nearly 400,000 homes a year by forcing councils to surrender large parts of the green belt risks undermining crucial areas.
The National Trust said the Labour government’s definition of lower-quality “grey belt” areas that would be targeted for home building was too broad, and could harm “some of the most valuable ‘green’ land to local communities”.
The Trust said in evidence to the House of Lords, reported in The Times, that it was “concerned with the significant breadth of green belt land which could be interpreted as grey belt”.
“Sites that are surrounded by built form, dominated by urban land uses or small sites between towns are often among those most utilised by urban populations to access nature or recreation, nor are they necessarily ‘grey’.
“These oases in a desert of urban grain are likely to be among the most important areas,” the Trust said.
The trust said it could lead to “the potential for a patchwork of piecemeal development across green belt areas [which would] result in a cumulative impact that serves to undermine the green belt as a whole”.
Deputy prime Minister Angela Rayner has announced that councils will be forced to give up swathes of the green belt to help Labour government achieve it target of 1.5 million new homes in five years.
Councils will have to review green belt boundaries, after reports earlier this week that the plans would greenlight home building in an area larger than Surrey.
The Trust’s concerns come as Ms Rayner and Keir Starmer face growing backlash to the plans. Kevin Hollinrake, the shadow housing secretary, said the move to build 370,000 new homes a year would “bulldoze through the concerns of local communities”.
“If Labour really want homes to be built where they are needed, they must think again,” he said.He also accused ministers of gerrymandering by targeting the green belt, when Labour’s voters traditionally live in more urban areas.
“What we’re seeing is typical socialism here, in terms of gerrymandering the house building out of urban areas and building in green belt and rural areas. That can’t be right,” he said.
Ms Rayner has defended her plans, saying the government would not shy away from taking “bold and decisive action” to fix the country’s housing crisis.
“We must all do our bit and we must all do more. We expect every local area to adopt a plan to meet their housing need. The question is where the homes and local services people expect are built, not whether they are built at all,” she said.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer pledged to back builders not “blockers”, saying: “We owe it to those working families to take urgent action, and that is what this government is doing.”
But Liberal Democrat housing spokesperson Gideon Amos accused ministers of planning to ignore local communities.
“The new homes we need must be genuinely affordable and community led, not dictated from Whitehall diktat,” he said. But Andrew Carter, chief executive of Centre for Cities, said: “Green belt reform needs to go much further than the grey belt rules to enable housebuilding in commuter corridors around big cities.”
Ministers say they want a “brownfield first approach” to planning and construction but cannot afford to ignore the housing crisis. Under the plans, developers will have to provide infrastructure, including GP clinics and public transport, for green belt developments.
Councils will receive and extra £100m and 300 additional planning officers tojhelp smooth the process.
