Why did British wildlife groups start collaborating in the destruction of nature?

64 November/December 2020

ENVIRONMENT

UT OF this horror comes

hope. In the backwash of the

pandemic we see the

shinled ruins of the old

economy, and the chance to

construct a new one. When we rebuild

our economic life, we should do it on

reen principles, avertin a crisis many

times reater than the coronavirus:

climate breakdown and the collapse of

our life-support systems.

This means no more fossil fuel-based

infrastructure. Even existing infrastruc

ture, according to climate scientists,

could push us past crucial thresholds.

It means an end to megaprojects whose

main purpose is enriching construction

companies.

Perhaps the deﬁnitive example of

such projects in the UK is theOxford –

Cambridge Arc. It’s a plan to build a con

urbation twice the size of Birmingham

(1 million homes) from Oxford to Cam

bridge. This is far beyond the region’s

housing demand. Its purpose, govern

ment agencies admit, is not to meet the

need for homes, but “to maximise [the

area’s] economic potential”.

Originally, the Arc was to be built

around an Expressway: a new motorway

linking the two cities. After a furious

public backlash, the Expressway, ac

cording to Highways England (the gov-

ernment agency promoting the project),

is now “paused” while it explores “oth

er potential road projects”. In either

case, there would be a massive expan

sion of the road network and the trac

Why did British wildlife groups

start collaborating in the

destruction of nature?

By George Monbiot

Cementing an area of 67,000 acres between Oxford and Cambridge

would not be Nature’s arc but greenwashed guff

The bigger and more

established an organisation

becomes, the more timid

and conformist it seems

to get, until it’s almost

indistinguishable from

the interests it should be

confronting.

it carries, though air pollution in the region

alreadybreaks legal limits. The new housing

would mean a huge increase in water use.

Already rivers in this area arerunning dry, as

demand exceeds supply.

Even before the pandemic struck, this meg

November/December 2020 65

used repeatedly as an excuse to destroy an-

cient and precious wild places, replacing them

withuniform saplings in plastic guards. Gov

ernment newspeak appears to have framed

their language and shaped their thinking.

Both the Wildlife Trusts in this consortium,

in response to my questions, tell me they have

applied for funds from Highways England, for

other projects. The boundaries blur and the

objectives mesh, until it seems hard to tell the

dierence between protectors and destroyers.

But I don’t think this is about money. I think

it’s about power.

The four groups all tell me that, despite the

statements in their press materials, they still

oppose the housing target. They say they want

to lay down green principles for construction

in the Arc and ensure it “respects environmen

tal limits”. But by rebranding the Arc as the

potential saviour of nature, I believe they are

playing straight into the government’s hands.

To make matters worse, none of them con

sulted the local campaign groups who have

been leading the ﬁght against the Oxford –

Cambridge Arc. Deborah Lovatt of the Buck

inghamshire Expressway Action Group tells

me she had no idea Nature’s Arc was coming.

“When I saw that they were describing this

scale of destruction as ‘a perfect opportunity’,

I felt sick”. They have “completely undermined

community campaigns”. This is ironic, as one

of the many complaints against the govern

alomaniac scheme was in trouble, due to the

strength of public opposition. The pandemic,

some of us assumed, would be the death

blow. Why would the government spend mon

ey on this grandiose nonsense, when there are

so many other priorities?

But last week, a new campaign came to the

rescue. It hasrebranded the project“Nature’s

Arc”. Apparently, with some adjustments, this

massive exercise in concrete pouring “could

show how development can restore nature,

rather than destroy it”. Building up to a million

homes,the new PR blitz tells us, is “the per

fect opportunity to invest in nature, improve

people’s lives and realise the green recovery”.

There’s no mention of trac, no mention of

the Arc’s contribution to air pollution, climate

breakdown, resource consumption or water

use. It’s suused with the kind of corporate-

Maoist exhortations you see in brochures for

new estates: “Nature’s Arc: Be part of it”.

It’s one of the most outrageous exercises in

greenwashing I’ve ever seen. But I haven’t told

you the worst of it. This gu was not published

by the government or the housebuilding com

panies. It was published by a consortium of

wildlife groups: the RSPB, the Woodland Trust

and the region’s two Wildlife Trusts. All of them

once fought the Arc and its associated devel

opments. The two Wildlife Trusts oncemount-

ed a legal challenge to the Expressway. This

looks to me like a switch from opposition to

collaboration.

There’s a remarkable, distressing similarity

between their campaign and Highways Eng

land’s own PR materials. The wildlife groups

use the same dismal, instrumental language.

They call nature “natural capital”. They re

brand nature reserves and woodlands as

“green infrastructure”. They uncritically de

ploy one of the most controversial concepts

in development planning: “net gain”. This is

the principle that established wildlife habi

tats destroyed by a project should be replaced

by a greater area of new habitat. It has been

They uncritically the controversial concept of

“net gain”, that established wildlife habitats

destroyed should be replaced by a greater area

of new habitat.

Nture’s rc now

ment’s proposal is the lack of public consulta-

tion.

The bigger and more established an organ

isation becomes, the more timid and con-

formist it seems to get, until it’s almost indis-

tinguishable from the interests it should be

confronting. In this age of environmental cri

sis and collapse, of government lies and cor-

porate power, we need our nature defenders

to rise like lions after slumber. Instead, they

queue at the abattoir gate like sedated lambs.

As commercial propaganda seeps into every

corner of public life, trust collapses. No one

knows what or whom to believe. We need cam

paigning groups that stand on principle, mo-

bilise their members, use their own words and

think their own thoughts. Instead, they swing

in the winds of power.

www.monbiot.com.