The petition of residents of the constituency of Cheadle,
Declares that the green belt is under unprecedented threat from short-sighted planning policies that prioritise profit over people and concrete over countryside; further that once the green belt is gone, its biodiversity, beauty and balance are lost forever; and further that the Government must be held accountable for the systematic erosion of these protected spaces, which were established to preserve nature, safeguard our heritage and maintain the health and wellbeing of communities across the UK.
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urge the Government to schedule a debate in the House on the protection of the green belt, and to resist destructive plans to sacrifice green fields, woodlands and wildlife habitats to unsustainable and unnecessary development, in favour of investing in sustainable housing solutions and protecting our natural environment for future generations.
And the petitioners remain, etc.—[Presented by Mr Tom Morrison, Official Report, 16 December 2025; Vol. 777, c. 882.]
[P003149]
Observations from the Minister for Housing and Planning (Matthew Pennycook): The Government have a brownfield-first approach to development, and we want to see such land prioritised wherever possible. The national planning policy framework makes it clear that substantial weight should be given to the value of using suitable brownfield land within settlements, including the development of under-utilised land and buildings to meet the need for homes and other uses.
The Government recognise that urban areas should be the focus for growth and have been clear that brownfield land must, wherever possible, be prioritised for new development. Through the revisions made to the NPPF on 12 December 2024, we broadened the definition of brownfield land, set a strengthened expectation that applications on brownfield land will be approved and made it clear that plans should promote an uplift in density in urban areas.
However, we know that there are simply not enough sites on brownfield land registers to deliver the volume of homes that the country needs each year, let alone enough that are viable and in the right location.
The Government’s new approach to the green belt, including prioritising the release of lower quality grey belt land and introducing “golden rules” to ensure that development benefits communities and nature, is set out in the revised national planning policy framework, published on 12 December 2024.
On 27 February last year, planning practice guidance was published to assist local authorities and other decision makers, and to support a consistent approach to determining whether land is grey belt. This new guidance will support authorities in producing local plans while also making sure that planning applications and development on suitable grey belt land can proceed in the short-term in areas without an up-to-date plan.
The Government have also provided 133 local planning authorities with £70,000 of pump priming funding each to contribute towards the costs of carrying out green belt reviews in their areas.
Where land is identified as grey belt, that does not mean it is automatically granted planning permission. The potential consequences of any planning proposal should still be assessed in the light of all relevant local and national policies. Our changes do not weaken existing protections for the natural environment, such as national landscapes, or the importance of the best and most versatile agricultural land.
On 22 September 2024, the Government published a brownfield passport policy paper, inviting views on how we can further prioritise building on previously used urban land, and how we can make best use of land in accessible locations, such as around train stations.
The Government are currently consulting on a new national planning policy framework that draws on the proposals outlined in that policy paper and the feedback received to it. It includes proposals designed to further strengthen support for development on brownfield land, support the intensification of urban and suburban areas, and enable more development in sustainable locations.
Our consultation proposals also include wider policy changes to strengthen support for conserving and enhancing the natural environment. We are proposing revisions to reflect local nature recovery strategies and align with current approaches to working with nature, including a stronger focus on green infrastructure and nature-based solutions. We have also set clearer expectations for how development proposals should conserve existing natural features such as chalk streams and contribute positively to nature’s recovery, such as by incorporating swift bricks where appropriate.