Opposition Leader Criticises High-Cost Wildlife Protection Project Amidst Growing Infrastructure Concerns
Keir Starmer, Leader of the Opposition, has made the £100m bat protection tunnel in Buckinghamshire the symbol of a broken planning system in Britain. But in challenging this costly infrastructure project, does he have a viable solution, or is he walking into a political trap?
For months, Starmer has targeted the bat tunnel as an emblem of what is wrong with the country’s approach to large-scale construction. The tunnel, a kilometre-long structure designed to protect bats from high-speed trains, has become one of the most contentious projects, with critics labelling it a waste of taxpayer money. Starmer has consistently criticised it, accusing the government of letting regulatory hurdles get in the way of progress.
However, as the government continues to defend its stance, questions remain about how to avoid similar projects in the future. While the Prime Minister’s team has promised reforms, sources within the government have admitted that they have yet to propose a definitive plan to prevent such costly wildlife protection measures from being necessary again.
HS2, the project responsible for the bat tunnel, will continue its construction until 2027, regardless of political pressure. Although suggestions such as a government-controlled fund to compensate for habitat damage have been floated, they have been met with scepticism by industry experts. They argue that this fund won’t prevent the need for similar structures in the future and that deeper changes to environmental and habitat laws may be required.
The key issue lies in the EU-derived “Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017,” which mandates the protection of rare species, such as the Bechstein’s bat, along the HS2 route. These regulations remain in force despite Brexit, and any attempt to weaken them could spark a clash with environmental groups and breach international agreements.
While ministers remain confident that their upcoming planning legislation will resolve these issues, the proposed reforms could fall short. A nature restoration fund, aimed at offsetting habitat damage, may not be practical for individual projects like the bat tunnel, where bespoke solutions are needed. The idea of pooling funds for large-scale compensation projects is proving complex and may face significant legal and logistical challenges.
Environmentalists are already sounding the alarm, with groups like the RSPB warning that any attempt to dilute environmental protections would be met with fierce opposition. Beccy Speight, the RSPB’s CEO, emphasised that the government must not roll back on existing nature laws, as they are crucial for protecting wildlife in the face of growing environmental crises.
As Starmer continues to criticise the bat tunnel and the planning system, it remains to be seen whether he can offer a credible alternative that balances the need for infrastructure development with the protection of the environment. The debate over the future of HS2 and its environmental impact is far from over.
