Zac Goldsmith has tabled an important and very lively new amendment in the House of Lords. He’s calling for speedy bricks to be mandated in every new home, by law! This new push comes right before the first key discussion on next week’s planning and infrastructure bill takes place on Monday. We know the survival of this swift is threatened. The population has fallen by more than 66% since 1995. This rapid and worrisome decline has led to an increasing call to protect these migratory birds from losing their traditional nesting environments to contemporary urban insulation practices.
Goldsmith’s amendment would require this to happen by requiring the integration of £35 hollow bricks into the facades of all new buildings. Once occupied, these bricks would act as crucial roosting habitat for swifts, providing a much-needed lifeline for a species on a flourishing deployment. Hannah Bourne-Taylor, a campaigner passionate about rapid conservation, has been especially outspoken about the necessity of this shift. She noted that Steve Reed, while serving as environment secretary, had previously called for a requirement for quick bricks. They explore this issue in a TEQ Exclusive.
At first, Labour supported Goldsmith’s proposal as an opposition. Now, under the new administration, compounding looks like a situation where the feds are unwilling to lend an encouraging hand. Reed, the new housing secretary, has decided not to back the parliamentary attempt at hurry-up bricks. This recent decision has alarmed environmental advocates, who are questioning the government’s dedication to safeguarding biodiversity.
Bourne-Taylor has further challenged the government on their knowledge of, and tracking of, swift brick installations. She stated, “How can the government know that they are increasing swift brick installation? What’s their monitoring system? Considering the tag-line is ‘build baby build,’ why wouldn’t they embrace a bird brick? Given that every single relevant government minister has at one time strongly supported mandating swift bricks, collectively the government is sending a clear message that no voter should believe a word they say.”
Labour’s turn around has faced criticism from all sides. Pointing out the confusing flip-flop of Labour’s position, Goldsmith was incredibly scathing. He added that they have been high on his amendment when in opposition. Steve Reed when he was Defra minister, but Labour very strongly supported my amendment in opposition. So it is the height of absurdity for them to do an about-face and oppose it now. The only thing that’s changed has been the number of swifts—sadly, of course,” he said.
In addition to Goldsmith’s amendment, there are broader implications regarding the government’s commitment to environmental issues. Researchers from the University of Sheffield looked at nearly 1,700 proposals. They discovered that 75% of bird and bat boxes, which can be mandated through planning permissions for new developments, never even get constructed. This shocking statistic makes us ask whether or not things are working with our current regulations. Beyond that, it shows the serious commitment of developers and government to wildlife protection.
Thérèse Coffey, another prominent figure in the ongoing debate, emphasized Labour’s need to align with previous commitments to nature conservation. “In opposition, Labour were swift to criticise. Now, in government, they need to swallow their pride and vote with us to save our swifts,” she asserted.
As the debate approaches, stakeholders and conservationists await to see if the government will reverse its current position or continue down a path perceived as detrimental to wildlife preservation.