Is the National Trust too cosy with the Labour Government?
As Hilary McGrady is in conversation with the Prime Minister in the latest National Trust Magazine, The Critic wonders why the charity does not hold this government to account on planning and nature as robustly as the previous one.
The National Trust tried to sell Bonds Meadow in Bovey Tracey, Devon, for development
For a party that prides itself on being the “natural party of government,” the Conservatives spent their final years behaving as if the electorate suffered from acute memory loss. But they aren’t the only ones currently banking on the public’s short memory: Britain’s major environmental NGOs, the National Trust, the RSPB, and the Wildlife Trusts, have undergone a convenient personality transplant since the keys to Downing Street changed hands. The transition from “principled defenders of nature” to “quiet partners of the state” has been so seamless it would be impressive, were it not so transparently cynical.
Under Liz Truss’s brief and chaotic tenure, these charities didn’t just disagree with policy; they launched a holy war. When Truss mooted “Investment Zones” with lighter-touch regulation, the RSPB famously “hit the nuclear button,” accusing the government of an “attack on nature.” It was a high-octane campaign of mass mailings and aggressive social media, designed to frame the Tories as villains in a plot to pave over the countryside.
Yet fast forward to today, and the “attack” has been replaced by a backroom silence. The Starmer government is currently advancing the Planning and Infrastructure Bill, a piece of legislation that doesn’t just tinker with environmental rules but allows them to be bypassed entirely in exchange for a fee. It is a pay-to-play model for habitat destruction. Where is the nuclear button now? The silence from the green lobby is deafening.
The hypocrisy would be comical if the stakes weren’t so high. Under Truss, the mere hint of a review into “nature-friendly” farming was met with a roar of disapproval. Under Labour, we have seen actual, real-terms cuts to the DEFRA budget, yet the response from the green establishment has been a muffled whimper. When Rachel Reeves boasts of clearing planning blockages, explicitly attacking bats, newts, and spiders as mere red tape, she is using the exact “anti-growth” rhetoric that once saw these groups brand the Conservatives as “liars.”
The reason for this silence is no mystery: the NGOs have been captured. Reports suggest leading groups have signed a de facto non-aggression pact, agreeing to endorse weak government amendments in exchange for a “reset” of the relationship. It is a cynical trade-off: the charities get a seat at the table, and the government gets to bulldoze the “red lines” they once claimed were sacred. Even George Monbiot has been forced to admit that these groups are being “conned,” watching as the mitigation hierarchy is shredded while they offer polite welcomes to the new regime.
The optics are made worse by the distinct smell of cronyism. Last year, the Chancellor boasted of unblocking a site after a “good relationship” with a developer. While the Treasury refused to name the site, industry speculation pointed to Thakeham, whose CEO happened to spend his party conference season backing Labour’s campaign. If this were a Conservative cash-for-planning scandal, the Green Alliance would be shouting from the rooftops. Instead, they’ve opted for the quiet life.
The government must realise that these NGOs are not objective experts; they are bad-faith political actors who adjust their outrage according to the colour of the ministerial tie. By continuing to court them, the Prime Minister is only legitimising a veto held by groups that are increasingly out of touch with their own supporters. A recent poll found that 40% of donors are less likely to give money to the National Trust and RSPB if they fail to hold the government to account on planning. People give money to protect birds and ancient forests, not to fund a government relations department.
If Britain is serious about growth and building houses, it must stop treating these organisations as the moral arbiters of the planning system. They have shown that their principles are for sale in exchange for access. The era of the green veto must end. It is time for the government to stop listening to the lobbyists and start building for the people who actually have to live here.