Wild Justice challenges government infrastructure bill

Conservation group Wild Justice has taken a strong stance against the government’s Planning and Infrastructure Bill, claiming it undermines existing environmental protections. In a recent letter to the government, Wild Justice has urged officials to correct a statement made by Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner during a parliamentary session. Rayner claimed that the bill would not diminish the current level of environmental protection; however, Wild Justice argues otherwise, asserting that the legislation would indeed weaken these protections.

Introduced to Parliament in March 2025, the Planning and Infrastructure Bill was portrayed by the government as a means to expedite infrastructure project timelines. During her statement, Rayner proclaimed that the proposed changes would uphold the integrity of environmental protections in law. However, Wild Justice, upon commissioning legal experts to examine the bill, received a starkly different conclusion. These planning barristers found that the legislation would actually reduce existing protections, chiefly by eliminating the requirement for developers to demonstrate beyond reasonable scientific doubt that projects would not adversely impact protected sites.

An important facet of the proposed legislation is its shift in responsibility concerning environmental mitigation. Developers would now have the option to contribute to a 'nature restoration levy scheme' as a way of addressing environmental damage, rather than providing concrete scientific evidence of their project’s impacts. Wild Justice contends that this approach is fundamentally flawed and could result in a significant decline in the current level of environmental safeguards.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) has weighed in on the debate, stating that the bill, as it stands, represents a “regression” of environmental protections. The OEP also indicated that the government had neglected to seek advice on how this bill would affect environmental laws, despite offering suggestions on potential enhancements to those protections.

Wild Justice insists that any assertion to the contrary lacks rationality, arguing that the bill’s structure is bound to lead to weakened protections. In a formal pre-action protocol letter, they urged Ms Rayner to amend the parliamentary record regarding her claims about the bill's impact on environmental safeguards, stating that failure to do so would result in a judicial review claim.

Dr Ruth Tingay, Co-Director of Wild Justice, emphasised the critical nature of the situation, expressing, “It’s important that the Secretary of State corrects her statement on the environmental ramifications of this bill because to continue to portray it as a ‘win win’ for nature and people is inaccurate and will mislead MPs into voting for something that is likely to have catastrophic consequences for protected species and habitats.”

Bob Elliot, the CEO of Wild Justice, further stressed the urgency by stating, “Our laws were already failing to defend nature - this bill takes us from bad to worse. The government’s claim that it does no harm is simply false. There is still a chance to put this right, but they must act now before the damage to our species and habitats becomes irreversible. We will not stand by while the foundations of environmental protection are dismantled.”

Ricardo Gama, a partner at Leigh Day representing Wild Justice, added to the discourse, saying, “The key thing for Wild Justice is that the Deputy Prime Minister has not been open and transparent about the fact that the Planning and Infrastructure Bill will weaken environmental protections in existing law. They say it is for MPs to decide whether the growth at all costs agenda which the government is pursuing is worth trashing hard fought environmental protections, but they can only do that if they clearly understand what the bill entails.”

The unfolding legal actions by Wild Justice reflect a growing concern regarding governance and environmental integrity during a crucial time for ecological conservation in the UK