On the 17th July 2025 the UK Government announced their policy for a ‘Civil Society Covenant’, setting out a ‘new principles-based arrangement for re-setting the relationship between UK Government and civil society’. This centres on a commitment to value a range of inputs made on a voluntary basis, whether this be in terms of time, money or knowledge. Such announcements relating to active citizens and the role of voluntarism are often presented by government to position civil society actors as “part of the fabric of our nation” and included in this embrace are a wide range of volunteers, groups, charities, faith organisations, co-operatives, trade unions, philanthropists, social enterprises and social investors. A very large chunk of society overall.

The ‘Covenant’ states that government will “promote participation and inclusion by involving people in decisions that affect their lives, ensuring their voices are heard and removing barriers to democratic participation”. This sets up a strong position, which appears to promote greater democratic engagement. Cutting to the chase then, the concern is that this type of political rhetoric can mask the reality of the main policy goals and agendas being pursued by administrations. The present government have made it clear that they intend to pursue a growth agenda – so how does this dovetail? The policy agenda of the David Cameron Conservative-led coalition government in 2010 brought us ‘Big Society’ and the Localism Act 2011 but this was accompanied by a wide and deep public sector austerity agenda and push to drive growth.

Ed Milliband’s actions to approve three massive solar factories (Mallard Pass and Gate Burton in Lincolnshire and Sunnica in Suffolk) in the first week of his tenure as Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero has highlighted the broken nature of our planning system. His decision just a few days after he took office demonstrated that he had not read the evidence placed before him and, without counter evidence, disregarded concerns about biodiversity, productive agricultural land loss, human rights issues and harms to community.

This makes a mockery of the promise made by Keir Starmer on his election as Prime Minister to serve the country, restore trust in politics, provide “stability and moderation” and “tread more lightly on your lives”.

​It opens the floodgates to unsustainable, opportunistic developments that will ruinate and scar the UK.

​For communities and campaigners who are anxious about plans and projects, it is may be a consolation to hear that, here in the UK, we have one of the most robust public consultation frameworks in the world.

​There are many reasons for this. Our democracy has often been more consultative than most, with checks and balances found all over our unwritten constitution. Statutory provisions for consultation can be traced back to the 1947 Town & Country Planning Act, and English common law has developed a vast body of legal precedents from challenges to the legality of consultation exercises.

Local authorities and other public bodies often face conflicting priorities and frequently have to make trade-offs between unpalatable options. At times, the whole point of consultation is to help decision-makers resolve these dilemmas by ensuring that stakeholder opinions are properly gathered and taken into account. Unfortunately, not every consultation is undertaken well, and as the legal rules and best practice have evolved, organisations – including planning authorities - have occasionally fallen short of the required standards.

With thanks to fundings from the Community Knowledge Fund we've now formally launched the Community Health Impact Assessment peer-to-peer learning programme, starting in the new year - www.urbanhealthcouncil.com/programs/chiat.

Health Impact Assessments (HIAs) should be more powerful with community voices shaping planning based on health needs. Existing legislation and guidance 'advise' on it, but the industry has skewed things to their advantage. We feel this can change by upholding the 4 values as directed by the World Health Organisation (WHO).

Our Community Health Impact Assessment peer-to-peer learning programme is for people and groups who feel the same and want to improve planning conditions and the behaviours of development stakeholders in their local areas.

(If you are not sure about who your MP is - we have some useful links on our Take Action page.)

Dear [MP Name]

I am seeking your support in helping to improve the planning system by ensuring that it is genuinely evidence-based and that public sector organisations (including the government) use credible, up to date information at all times.  I hope you will agree with me that this is imperative to maintain confidence in both the system and in the government's aims.

With this in mind, I would like you to write to the Prime Minister, copying the Secretary of State (DHLUC), on my behalf, requesting that policy be updated to ensure the latest data available from public sector sources is used in determining requirements and in making or publishing government statements.  If this is not the case, the source of all figures used should be clearly stated.

Is wildlife and the natural world an escape from your routine? Is it part of your everyday? Is it a means by which you connect with the landscape around you? Perhaps a way to connect with people too?

For me, it’s all the above, and I don’t see that being in contradiction with my day job as an Ecological Consultant. If asked, however, I would call myself a birder, applied ecologist and wildlife conservationist. Again, not a contradiction in my view. 

It’s from all these perspectives I have outlined my personal views on development in the farmed landscape and its effects on wildlife. In doing so, I realise I have not mentioned other issues that will matter dearly to people, such as the loss of Grade 1 agricultural land or the visual character of the places people work and live in. These are beyond my expertise. 

Eight Freeports were announced by the Government last Year. Most recently they have been promoted in the Levelling-up White Paper, released Feb 2nd, as a way to increase prosperity and investment in the more deprived areas of the UK.

A closer look at the purpose and plan for these low tax, tariff free zones puts into question what they mean by the word ‘prosperous’. What will these Freeports mean for local communities and UK citizens?

We all recognise air pollution is a threat to the health of both humans and wildlife. And we know action is needed to introduce policies and measures that will reduce the harmful effects we are facing every day. The burden on the NHS, our economy and nature’s recovery is very visible.

With that in mind, more than 60 community representatives joined the online seminar hosted by the Community Planning Alliance (CPA) on 7th December, the first of three planned events aimed at engaging communities more actively in the air pollution/air quality debate. The lively chat inputs clearly showed the level of interest and concern about many issues, with questions about wood burning stoves and clean air zones being among the challenging topics raised with the speakers.

​The Community Planning Alliance was founded on the back of conversations between campaigners from all over the UK who saw their local green spaces threatened by development (of all kinds). 

We realised that we needed to understand the national, cumulative, scale of these many separate threats. And that is why our Grassroots Map was born.

Now containing more than 500 local campaigns, it paints a stark picture of the huge pressures the UK’s natural environment is facing – and just how broken the planning system is. With each of the habitats that people are campaigning to save being just one in a process of ‘death by a thousand cuts’.