Because it will reduce unnecessary bureaucracy and introduce some common sense and consistency in approach when addressing important issues. It will make environmentalists realise that things cannot always be on their terms, but there must be a rational and reasonable balance struck between the social and economic interests of communities and the preservation of the status quo where plants and animals are concerned.
Protection of the environment and ecology is necessary, but it must be rationalised with social and economic imperatives. Statutory consultation with Natural England and wildlfie trusts etc as part of the planning process should be reduced and/or limited. Too often, their power to block development is irrational and unnecessary, and is a block to sensible and vital progress to local economies. One local scheme has spent over £0.5 million on measures to protect animals which are common in the area. Natural England would not allow the complete clearance of the site and the relocation of the animals elsewhere, to "maintain the biodiversity" of the site. As a result, the creation of a £50 million, 1500 job business park in one of the country's most deprived wards was delayed, developers withdrew, and the recession killed any current interest in creating new employment opportunities. Natural England are anti-progress and would be quite happy to see large brownfield sites remaining derelict and unsightly rather than reviving the economies of vulnerable areas, just to "protect" species that are common and probably don't need protection in any case.