NZCPR: Submission on the Natural Environment Bill and the Planning Bill

NZCPR Submission on the Natural Environment Bill and the Planning Bill

11 February 2026

Committee Secretariat
Environment Select Committee
Parliament Buildings
Wellington

Dear Sir,

Thank you for providing the opportunity to make a submission on the Natural Environment Bill and the Planning Bill.

This submission on is on behalf of New Zealand Centre for Political Research, a public policy think tank established in 2005. 

Position on the Legislation

The NZCPR supports the overall intent of these bills to replace the Resource Management Act 1991 with a simpler, faster and more efficient framework focused on environmental protection, land use planning, and property rights.

New Zealanders deserve a planning framework that is efficient, predictable, and fair. Accordingly, we would like to firstly draw the Committee’s attention to the policy constraints under which these Bills are being produced and secondly recommend some changes.

Coalition Policy Constraints

On their election in 2023, the Coalition was explicit in its commitment to end race‑based policies.

Both the National–ACT and National–New Zealand First Coalition Agreements stated: “The Coalition Government’s priorities for this term include ending race‑based policies.”

National’s Agreement with New Zealand First went further: “The Coalition Government will work to improve outcomes for all New Zealanders, and will not advance policies that seek to ascribe different rights and responsibilities to New Zealanders on the basis of their race or ancestry.”

And: “The Coalition Government will defend the principle that New Zealanders are equal before the law, with the same rights and obligations, and with the guarantee of the privileges and responsibilities of equal citizenship in New Zealand.”

To uphold these promises to New Zealanders, the new planning statutes should be “colourblind”, with no distinctions based on race. As a result, they should apply equally to all New Zealanders regardless of ethnicity.

Reform Considerations

The purpose of planning law is to manage land use, environmental effects, infrastructure, and development. It is not an appropriate vehicle for embedding Treaty‑related arrangements, cultural preferences, or ethnicity‑specific governance structures.

Furthermore, once the Resource Management Act is repealed, the statutory basis for all existing RMA‑linked special arrangements with iwi that were put in place by both central and local government, no longer exists. Those mechanisms were designed for a planning system that Parliament is now rejecting. It is therefore neither logical nor constitutionally coherent to carry them forward into the new regime.

In fact, if the Coalition retained RMA‑era special arrangements with iwi under the new laws they would not only be entrenching race‑based privilege at the very time they have committed to restoring equal citizenship, but they would be embedding in the new system the very mechanisms that caused the RMA to fail.

NZCPR Recommendations

Since continuing such arrangements within the new system would directly contradict the Coalition’s pledge to end race‑based policy and ensure all New Zealanders stand equal before the law, this submission recommends the amendment or removal of all such provisions that introduce or perpetuate race-based distinctions, in order to ensure the laws apply equally to all New Zealanders regardless of ethnicity and in fulfilment of Coalition Agreement commitments.

Our submission identifies the clauses in both bills that reference or prioritise Maori-specific rights, that could be interpreted as creating unequal treatment based on race or ethnicity - such as mandatory consultations with iwi, exemptions for customary activities, preferential rights in decision-making or resource allocation, and the integration of tikanga Maori or kaitiakitanga.

Removing or ‘neutralising’ these clauses would align the legislation with principles of equal application under the law, reducing potential for division while maintaining core environmental and planning objectives.

This clause analysis is detailed in Appendix 1 for the Natural Environment Bill and Appendix 2 for the Planning Bill, with Appendix 3 outlining how the removal or neutralisation of each of the clauses could be implemented in practical terms.

Each appendix lists the relevant sections in chronological order as they appear in each bill, with a concise excerpt and brief context explaining the race-based element.

We recommend the Committee amend the bills by striking out these provisions entirely or rephrasing them to achieve ‘neutrality’ by removing ethnic-specific references - for example replacing iwi consultations with general stakeholder consultations, or customary protections with neutral heritage or environmental safeguards.

Key Arguments

Here are the key arguments in favour of the recommended amendments:

1. Equality and Non-Discrimination:
   The bills, as drafted, embed distinctions based on ethnicity, such as requiring regard for iwi planning documents, exemptions for Maori customary fishing, or preferential rights for iwi in resource tenders. This conflicts with the colour-blind commitment of the Coalition to ensure laws treat all individuals and groups equally, without reference to race.
2. Efficiency and Simplicity:
   Retaining these clauses perpetuates the complexities found in the RMA, including overlapping obligations for Treaty settlements and iwi consultation, which can delay processes and increase costs. A streamlined, ethnicity-neutral framework would better support the bills’ goals of enabling development and protecting the environment.
3. Consistency with Broader Policy:
   The Coalition Government's stated aim is to reform the RMA for clarity and property rights. Removing race-based elements ensures consistency with their premise of only enacting policies that promote one law for all.
4. Practical Impact:
   Provisions like mandatory iwi input on national instruments or protections of sites of significance to Maori could lead to uneven application, where decisions favour one ethnic group. Neutral alternatives, such as heritage protection for culturally significant sites based on objective criteria would achieve similar outcomes without race-based bias.

For the purpose of this submission, we have used the term “neutralise” in reference to the points made in item 4 above. To provide further clarification, here is a more fulsome explanation:

Neutralising Clauses

By "neutralising" these clauses, we mean reworking those that are essential to achieve their intended environmental or planning outcomes through existing general laws or ethnicity-neutral mechanisms, rather than creating or retaining race-specific instruments.

For example, protections for major sites of significance to Maori (such as wahi tapu or culturally important water bodies) could be handled under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014, which already safeguards historic places of national or outstanding value based on objective criteria like historical, archaeological, or cultural importance. These apply equally to sites valued by any group, without ethnic distinctions.

Where a site on private land is protected or listed under this Act (including any wahi tapu sites that meet the criteria), any resource consent or permit application that may affect the site would involve consultation with Heritage New Zealand as the responsible agency and affected party. Heritage New Zealand would assess impacts, provide recommendations to the relevant council or authority, and, where appropriate (particularly for wahi tapu), may seek input from relevant iwi. However, Heritage New Zealand remains the lead agency overseeing the process and ensuring compliance with objective heritage standards.

Similarly, references to "customary" land or rights could be reframed as "legacy" land provisions, allowing for flexible development (e.g., papakainga-style housing without standard subdivision requirements) on historically significant or multi-generational properties. This could extend benefits beyond Maori land to other entities, such as churches preserving community hubs or families maintaining intact farms for future generations, using neutral criteria like long-term ownership or cultural/heritage value.

Such an approach would preserve practical benefits like streamlined building on ancestral lands, protection of culturally significant sites, and community participation while ensuring the laws are inclusive, colour-blind, and free of preferential treatment based on ethnicity. It reduces complexity, potential for unequal application, and administrative overlap by relying on established, objective frameworks that apply to all New Zealanders equally.

We urge the Committee to adopt the recommendations below to create legislation that is enduring and fair.

Recommendations:

• Amend the Natural Environment Bill by removing or neutralising the clauses listed in Appendix 1 (see Appendix 3 for how this can be achieved).
• Amend the Planning Bill by removing or neutralising the clauses listed in Appendix 2 (see Appendix 3 for how this can be achieved)..
• Ensure any retained Treaty-related elements are limited to transitional arrangements, with a sunset clause to ensure the legislation treats all New Zealanders as equals under the law.

Thank you for considering this submission.

Yours sincerely,
Dr Muriel Newman
New Zealand Centre for Political Research
 

Appendix 1: Race-Based Clauses in Natural Environment Bill (Government Bill 234-1, 2025)

1. Section 8 – Crown Treaty Responsibilities
   Recognises the Crown's responsibilities under the Treaty; links to Maori interests in Section 11 and requires consultation with iwi authorities on national instruments and plans.
   Context: Establishes overarching Treaty duties specific to the Maori/Crown relationship.
2. Section 9 – Crown to enter agreements to uphold Treaty settlement redress or arrangements
   Crown must work with post-settlement governance entities (and specifically Nga Hapu o Ngati Porou) to agree on equivalent operation of redress/arrangements.
   Context: Mandates negotiation and continuity of settlement-specific redress.
3. Section 10 – Treaty redress or arrangements to be given same or equivalent effect
   Until agreements under s9, all functions must give equivalent effect to Treaty redress as under the RMA.
   Context: Requires ongoing preferential treatment of Treaty settlements.
4. Section 11 – Goals
   Provide for Maori interests through: (i) Maori participation in national instruments, spatial planning, natural environment plans; (ii) identification/protection of sites of significance to Maori (wahi tapu, water bodies, coastal sites); (iii) enabling development/protection of identified Maori land.
   Context: Core goal prioritising Maori-specific participation and protections.
5. Section 20 – Resource rights preservation
   Preserves proprietary/customary rights in freshwater/geothermal; allows geothermal use per tikanga Maori for tangata whenua benefit if no adverse effects.
   Context: Explicit recognition of tikanga and tangata whenua benefit.
6. Section 70 – National instrument process
   Minister must provide drafts to iwi authorities, give time/opportunity for advice, and take regard of that advice.
   Context: Mandatory iwi consultation/preferential input.
7. Section 97(4)(b) – Regard statutory acknowledgements and iwi planning documents
   In plan preparation/decisions, regard statutory acknowledgements, iwi planning documents, and customary marine title group documents.
   Context: Requires giving weight to Maori-specific documents.
8. Section 101 – Protected customary rights
   Plans must not permit activities with more-than-minor adverse effects on protected customary rights (under Marine and Coastal Area Act 2011).
   Context: Special protection/exemption for customary rights.
9. Section 103 – Customary marine title
   Plans must not permit activities with more-than-minor adverse effects on customary marine title group relationships with areas.
   Context: Protection tied to customary marine title groups.
10. Section 114 – Rules that control fishing do not apply to Maori customary fishing rights
    Exempts Maori customary non-commercial fishing under specified Treaty settlements/Fisheries Act regulations.
    Context: Exemption specific to Maori customary rights.
11. Section 117 – Statutory acknowledgements
    Must attach statutory acknowledgements to plans; provisions of settlement legislation apply.
    Context: Integrates Treaty settlement redress into plans.
12. Section 159 – Activities in customary title areas
    Permit considerations assess against planning documents by customary marine title groups.
    Context: Requires regard for group-specific documents.
13. Section 176 – Commencement of permit where customary marine title agreement in effect
    Permits follow Marine and Coastal Area Act rules; prohibits contrary to wahi tapu conditions.
    Context: Special rules tied to customary title and wahi tapu.
14. Section 204(2) – Defined terms (Right to apply)
    Defines "right to apply" as exclusive right for iwi to apply for permits/authorisations based on preferential rights.
    Context: Preferential iwi rights in authorisations.
15. Section 227/228 – Records of iwi/hapu
    Regional councils must maintain records of iwi/hapu contact details, planning documents, kaitiakitanga areas, Mana Whakahono a Rohe.
    Context: Ongoing obligations to recognise and record Maori-specific entities/areas.
16. Section 235(2) – Delegation
    Unitary authorities consult tangata whenua on local matters; may appoint commissioners with tikanga Maori understanding.
    Context: Consultation and tikanga-specific appointments.
17. Section 298 – Compliance strategy
    Strategies account for Treaty settlements, iwi/hapu/Maori agreements (including Mana Whakahono a Rohe); work with iwi/hapu.
    Context: Enforcement tied to Maori agreements.
18. Section 305 – Emergency regulations
    Consult iwi authorities, post-settlement entities, Nga Hapu o Ngati Porou, Mana Whakahono parties, customary rights groups.
    Context: Group-specific consultation.
19. Section 313/321 – Levy/charges exemptions
    Exempt protected/customary rights groups from levies/charges when exercising rights.
    Context: Cost exemptions for customary activities.
20. Schedule 3, Clause 22 – Tenders/authorisations
    Give effect to iwi preferential rights in tenders/regulations (references specific Treaty settlement Acts).
    Context: Preferential iwi rights in allocation.

Additional scattered references in Schedules – including notifications to iwi, water orders protecting Maori significance etc – will also need to be removed.

Appendix 2: Race-Based Clauses in Planning Bill (Government Bill 235-1, 2025)

1. Section 3 – Definitions
   Defines iwi authority, mana whenua, tangata whenua, Treaty/Tiriti, statutory acknowledgement, sites of significance to Maori, identified Maori land, protected customary rights, customary marine title group, kaitiakitanga, tikanga Maori, taonga, etc.
   Context: Foundational definitions embedding Maori-specific concepts.
2. Section 8 – Treaty of Waitangi/Tiriti o Waitangi
   Recognises Crown responsibilities; links to Section 11 goals and requires consultations (eg, with iwi on national instruments, spatial plans); regard for acknowledgements, Mana Whakahono a Rohe.
   Context: Descriptive Treaty clause specific to Maori.
3. Section 9 – Crown agreements
   Crown seeks agreements with post-settlement entities/Nga Hapu o Ngati Porou for equivalent redress.
   Context: Mandates settlement continuity.
4. Section 10 – Equivalent effect
   Functions must give equivalent effect to Treaty redress as under RMA until agreements.
   Context: Ongoing preferential effect.
5. Section 11 – Goals
   Provide for Maori interests through: (i) Maori participation in national instruments, spatial planning, land use plans; (ii) identification/protection of sites of significance to Maori; (iii) enabling development/protection of identified Maori land.
   Context: Core goal prioritising Maori participation/protections.
6. Section 46 – National instruments
   Minister provides drafts to iwi, regards advice.
   Context: Preferential iwi input.
7. Section 67/70 – Spatial plans
   Committees consult iwi/customary groups; include/attach acknowledgements, sites of significance, customary areas; regard iwi documents.
   Context: Mandatory consultation and regard for Maori elements.
8. Section 82 – Protected customary rights
   Plans must not permit greater than minor adverse effects on protected customary rights.
   Context: Special protection.
9. Section 100 – Statutory acknowledgements
   Attach to land use plans; obligations apply.
   Context: Integrates redress.
10. Section 188 – Records
    Territorial authorities maintain iwi/hapu records (contact, documents, kaitiakitanga areas, Mana Whakahono).
    Context: Ongoing recognition obligations.
11. Schedule 2, Clause 5(2)(a)(xiii) – Regard Maori customary regulations
    Regard taiapure, mahinga mataitai.
    Context: Protects customary fishing areas.
12. Schedule 5, Clause 2 – Designations
    Recognise identified Maori land as taonga tuku iho; consider owners'/hapu rights for retention/control/occupation.
    Context: Taonga protections in infrastructure.

Additional references, including those in schedules/processes for consultation, hearings, emergency regulations etc, will also need to be removed.

Appendix 3: Detailed Examples of Removing or Neutralising Race-Based Clauses

*Section 1: Natural Environment Bill (Government Bill 234-1, 2025)

Appendix 1, Item 1: Section 8 – Crown Treaty Responsibilities
Original Text: Recognises Crown Treaty obligations; provides for Maori interests via participation in instruments/plans, protection of sites of significance to Maori (wahi tapu etc.), enabling development/protection of identified Maori land; requires iwi consultations (e.g., s70) and regard for acknowledgements/iwi documents.
Removal in Practice: Delete section and cross-references. Eliminates ethnic-specific goals and consultations; uses general public input.
Neutralisation in Practice: Rephrase as "Stakeholder Participation and Heritage Responsibilities": community participation, heritage site protections via Heritage NZ Act, legacy land development for any multi-generational owner.

Appendix 1, Item 2: Section 9 – Crown to seek agreements to uphold Treaty settlement redress
Original Text: Crown works with post-settlement entities/Nga Hapu o Ngati Porou for agreements ensuring equivalent Treaty redress effect.
Removal in Practice: Delete. Ends ethnic-specific negotiations; uses general law.
Neutralisation in Practice: Broaden to historical settlements; apply to any documented claim neutrally.

Appendix 1, Item 3: Section 10 – Treaty redress to be given equivalent effect
Original Text: Interim equivalent effect for Treaty redress until s9 agreements.
Removal in Practice: Delete. Removes ethnic preference; immediate neutral rules.
Neutralisation in Practice: Change to historical redress equivalence based on objective legal status.

Appendix 1, Item 4: Section 11 – Goals
Original Text: Includes goal to provide for Maori interests (participation, site protection, identified Maori land).
Removal in Practice: Delete Maori-specific goal; retain environmental ones.
Neutralisation in Practice: Add neutral community/heritage goal: stakeholder participation, heritage sites via Heritage NZ Act, legacy land flexibility.

Appendix 1, Item 5: Section 20 – Resource rights preservation
Original Text: Allows geothermal use per tikanga Maori for tangata whenua benefit (if no adverse effects).
Removal in Practice: Delete tikanga/tangata whenua parts. No ethnic exemptions.
Neutralisation in Practice: Allow low-impact communal uses for any group if sustainable.

Appendix 1, Item 6: Section 70 – National instrument process
Original Text: Minister provides drafts to iwi authorities, regards advice.
Removal in Practice: Delete iwi-specific; general stakeholders.
Neutralisation in Practice: Consult relevant stakeholders/landowners/heritage experts.

Appendix 1, Item 7: Section 97(4)(b) – Regard statutory acknowledgements and iwi documents
Original Text: Regard statutory acknowledgements, iwi planning documents, customary marine title documents.
Removal in Practice: Delete; no mandatory ethnic documents.
Neutralisation in Practice: Regard heritage acknowledgements and community documents.

Appendix 1, Item 8: Section 101 – Protected customary rights
Original Text: Plans must not permit >minor adverse effects on protected customary rights (Takutai Moana Act).
Removal in Practice: Delete special protection; general environmental limits.
Neutralisation in Practice: Protect long-term use rights (neutral test: documented sustainable use).

Appendix 1, Item 9: Section 103 – Customary marine title
Original Text: Plans must not permit >minor adverse effects on customary marine title group relationships.
Removal in Practice: Delete; neutral marine rules.
Neutralisation in Practice: Protect heritage/cultural relationships via Heritage NZ Act criteria.

Appendix 1, Item 10: Section 114 – Fishing rules exemption for Maori customary non-commercial
Original Text: Exempts Maori customary non-commercial fishing under Treaty/Fisheries regs.
Removal in Practice: Delete exemption; uniform fishing rules.
Neutralisation in Practice: Allow sustainable non-commercial fishing for any low-impact user.

Appendix 1, Item 11: Section 117 – Statutory acknowledgements
Original Text: Attach acknowledgements to plans; settlement provisions apply.
Removal in Practice: Delete attachment.
Neutralisation in Practice: Attach heritage acknowledgements where qualifying.

Appendix 1, Item 12: Section 159 – Activities in customary title areas
Original Text: Regard customary marine title group planning documents in permits.
Removal in Practice: Delete group-specific regard.
Neutralisation in Practice: Regard relevant community/heritage documents.

Appendix 1, Item 13: Section 176 – Permit commencement with customary marine title
Original Text: Follows Takutai Moana Act rules for customary title; prohibits contrary to wahi tapu.
Removal in Practice: Delete ethnic rules; neutral commencement.
Neutralisation in Practice: Prohibit breaches of heritage conditions for any protected site.

Appendix 1, Item 14: Section 204(2) – Right to apply
Original Text: Exclusive/preferential right for iwi to apply for permits.
Removal in Practice: Delete preferential definition.
Neutralisation in Practice: Priority for documented historical use by any group.

Appendix 1, Item 15: Section 227/228 – Records of iwi/hapu
Original Text: Maintain iwi/hapu contacts, documents, kaitiakitanga areas, Mana Whakahono.
Removal in Practice: Delete ethnic registers.
Neutralisation in Practice: General stakeholder/heritage records.

Appendix 1, Item 16: Section 235(2) – Delegation
Original Text: Consult tangata whenua; appoint commissioners with tikanga understanding.
Removal in Practice: Delete; general appointments.
Neutralisation in Practice: Consult communities; appoint with relevant cultural expertise.

Appendix 1, Item 17: Section 298 – Compliance strategy
Original Text: Account for Treaty settlements, iwi/hapu agreements (incl. Mana Whakahono); work with iwi/hapu.
Removal in Practice: Delete ethnic ties; general strategies.
Neutralisation in Practice: Account for historical agreements; collaborate with stakeholders.

Appendix 1, Item 18: Section 305 – Emergency regulations
Original Text: Consult iwi authorities, post-settlement entities, Nga Hapu o Ngati Porou, Mana Whakahono, customary groups.
Removal in Practice: Delete group-specific; consult affected parties.
Neutralisation in Practice: Consult stakeholders and heritage groups.

Appendix 1, Item 19: Section 313/321 – Levy/charges exemptions
Original Text: Exempt protected/customary groups from levies when exercising rights.
Removal in Practice: Delete ethnic exemptions; uniform charges.
Neutralisation in Practice: Exempt low-impact traditional uses by any qualifying group.

Appendix 1, Item 20: Schedule 3, Clause 22 – Tenders/authorisations
Original Text: Give effect to iwi preferential rights in tenders (references Treaty Acts).
Removal in Practice: Delete preferential rights; fair allocation.
Neutralisation in Practice: Priority for historical users based on objective criteria.

*Section 2: Race-Based Clauses in the Planning Bill (Government Bill 235-1, 2025)

Appendix 2, Item 1: Section 3 – Definitions
Original Text: Defines terms including iwi authority, mana whenua, tangata whenua, Treaty/Tiriti, statutory acknowledgement, sites of significance to Maori, identified Maori land, protected customary rights, customary marine title group, kaitiakitanga, tikanga Maori, taonga, etc.
Removal in Practice: Delete all ethnicity-specific definitions. Retain neutral ones. Prevents race-based concepts from foundational interpretation.
Neutralisation in Practice: Replace with neutral analogs: "Legacy land" = land with historical/multi-generational value under objective criteria (e.g., long-term ownership); "Heritage sites" = sites under Heritage NZ Act; generalise "community authority" for recognised groups.

Appendix 2, Item 2: Section 8 – Treaty of Waitangi/Tiriti o Waitangi
Original Text: Recognises Crown responsibilities; provides for Maori interests through participation, protection of sites of significance to Maori, enabling development/protection of identified Maori land; links to consultations and regard for acknowledgements/Mana Whakahono.
Removal in Practice: Delete section and cross-references. No ethnic-specific Treaty duties.
Neutralisation in Practice: Rephrase as "Stakeholder Participation and Heritage Responsibilities" (similar to Natural Environment Bill example): general participation, heritage protections, legacy land development.

Appendix 2, Item 3: Section 9 – Crown agreements
Original Text: Crown seeks agreements with post-settlement entities/Nga Hapu o Ngati Porou for equivalent redress.
Removal in Practice: Delete. No ethnic-specific negotiations.
Neutralisation in Practice: Broaden to historical settlements.

Appendix 2, Item 4: Section 10 – Equivalent effect
Original Text: Functions give equivalent effect to Treaty redress until agreements.
Removal in Practice: Delete interim preference.
Neutralisation in Practice: Apply to historical redress objectively.

Appendix 2, Item 5: Section 11 – Goals
Original Text: Provide for Maori interests through participation, site protection, identified Maori land. Removal in Practice: Delete Maori-specific goal.
Neutralisation in Practice: Neutral community/heritage goal.

Appendix 2, Item 6: Section 46 – National instruments
Original Text: Minister provides drafts to iwi authorities, regards advice (min. 20 working days). Removal in Practice: Delete iwi-specific; general stakeholders.
Neutralisation in Practice: Consult relevant stakeholders/heritage experts.

Appendix 2, Item 7: Section 67/70 – Spatial plans
Original Text: Committees consult iwi/customary groups; include/attach acknowledgements, sites of significance, customary areas; regard iwi documents.
Removal in Practice: Delete ethnic requirements.
Neutralisation in Practice: Consult affected communities; include heritage acknowledgements.

Appendix 2, Item 8: Section 82 – Protected customary rights
Original Text: Plans must not permit >minor adverse effects on protected customary rights.
Removal in Practice: Delete special protection.
Neutralisation in Practice: Neutral environmental limits for long-term uses.

Appendix 2, Item 9: Section 100 – Statutory acknowledgements
Original Text: Attach to land use plans; obligations apply.
Removal in Practice: Delete.
Neutralisation in Practice: Attach heritage acknowledgements.

Appendix 2, Item 10: Section 188 – Records
Original Text: Maintain iwi/hapu records (contact, documents, kaitiakitanga areas, Mana Whakahono).
Removal in Practice: Delete ethnic registers.
Neutralisation in Practice: General stakeholder records.

Appendix 2, Item 11: Schedule 2, Clause 5(2)(a)(xiii) – Regard Maori customary regulations
Original Text: Regard regulations relating to taiapure, mahinga mataitai, or other non-commercial Maori customary fishing.
Removal in Practice: Delete.
Neutralisation in Practice: Regard established customary fishing areas under neutral sustainability tests.

Appendix 2, Item 12: Schedule 5, Clause 2 – Designations
Original Text: Recognise identified Maori land as taonga tuku iho; consider owners'/hapu rights for retention/control/occupation.
Removal in Practice: Delete ethnic recognition.
Neutralisation in Practice: Recognise legacy land/heritage properties; consider long-term owners' rights neutrally.

Please note: The Environment Select Committee work on the Natural Environment Bill can be seen HERE and the Planning Bill HERE.