The Labour Government faced a significant internal rebellion on Monday night as several of its own MPs broke ranks to back a Commons amendment opposing its controversial housebuilding reforms, amid claims they amount to a “wreckage” of environmental protections.
Housing Minister Matthew Pennycook defended the Government’s plans to establish a Nature Restoration Fund, which would allow developers to make payments toward conservation projects in return for damaging natural habitats. Mr Pennycook insisted the proposals were not a “cash-to-trash” scheme, and claimed they would speed up homebuilding while restoring biodiversity.
However, Labour backbencher Chris Hinchliff (North East Hertfordshire) led a rebellion by forcing a vote on Amendment 69, which would have required developers to improve the conservation status of environmental features before damaging them.
Despite support from 180 MPs, the amendment was defeated by 307 votes, with a majority of 127. The rebellion saw 14 Labour MPs, including prominent names like Diane Abbott, Clive Lewis, Richard Burgon, and Nadia Whittome, vote against their own Government.
Speaking in the Commons, Mr Hinchliff described the Nature Restoration Fund as “the kernel of a good idea,” but argued its current form is unfit for purpose. “The weight of evidence against how it has been drafted is overwhelming,” he said.
He called for the fund to be restructured to ensure restoration happens before damage, especially for irreplaceable habitats like chalk streams. He also proposed giving residents the right to appeal large developments and new town hall powers to block developers who leave projects unfinished.
Mr Pennycook countered that the existing environmental status quo was failing and said Labour’s reforms offered a “win-win” for both housing and conservation. “The Nature Restoration Fund will do exactly as its name suggests. It will restore, not harm nature,” he told MPs. “It is plainly nonsense to suggest developers can simply pay Government and then wantonly harm nature.”
Under the new plans, funds would be channelled to Natural England, which would be empowered to compulsorily acquire land for implementing Environmental Delivery Plans (EDPs). The minister added that building new homes need not come at the expense of the environment and that the reforms were necessary to meet Labour’s target of building 1.5 million homes and delivering 150 major infrastructure projects.
Nevertheless, critics within and outside the party accused the Government of sacrificing nature for the sake of rapid development.
Neil Duncan-Jordan, Labour MP for Poole, acting as a teller for the ayes, lambasted the idea that the debate could be reduced to a simple battle between “builders versus blockers.” He criticised the “developer-led model” of planning, where big housebuilders “drip feed developments to maximise profit, not affordability.”
Meanwhile, the Conservatives accused Labour of greenwashing. Shadow Housing Minister Paul Holmes said: “While developers may cheer the ability to pay into a Nature Restoration Fund instead of taking direct responsibility, we must ask: is this really restoration, or is it just greenwashing?”
More Read
Calls for stronger eco-requirements in new developments also came from across the House. Amendments by Labour’s Jenny Riddell-Carpenter and Barry Gardiner, along with Lib Dem housing spokesman Gideon Amos, advocated for the inclusion of swift bricks—hollow bricks that provide nesting space for birds—in all new builds.
In response, Mr Pennycook said the Government was exploring changes to national planning policy to make swift bricks a standard feature, unless site-specific factors made them unfeasible.
He told MPs: “We would expect to see at least one swift brick in all new brick-built houses, reinforcing our commitment to nature-positive planning.”
As the fallout from the vote continues, it’s clear Labour’s housebuilding agenda is facing growing dissent from within its own ranks—fuelled by concerns that speed must not come at the cost of sustainability.
