I thank the Minister and the members of the Bill Committee for their hard work on this legislation. I regret, however, that the Minister has been so resistant to amendments from my hon. Friend Gideon Amos and from others on the Liberal Democrat Benches, which I now rise to support. My constituents in Bicester and Woodstock want to see a planning system that delivers decent, affordable homes for those excluded from housing, that recognises that investment in infrastructure must come before housing development and that does not create a false distinction between development and protecting nature.

Linda and Gary live in my Constituency. Gary has complex needs and Linda is his carer. Their property is not suitable; Gary cannot shower or get to the garden by himself. Linda and Gary have been bidding to West Oxfordshire district council for a property suitable to meet Gary’s needs for more than a year, but they have been continually unsuccessful. As many hon. Members have stated, we have a crisis of social housing in this country. That is why Liberal Democrats want to see an additional 150,000 social homes built every year through Amendment 15, and why new Clause 112 is so important, preventing developers from ducking the delivery of social homes.

We also need developers to develop the buildings that have been consented. In Cherwell district council in my constituency, more than 8,000 homes have been consented but not built. That has led to a crisis, with villages such as Ambrosden and Launton at the mercy of opportunist developers who have hoovered up sites not contained in the local plan. New clause 3 would put an end to the land banking of consented sites, forcing developers to use them or lose them.

On Second Reading I highlighted to the Secretary of State that there are three nationally significant infrastructure projects proposed in my constituency. These mega-schemes relate to energy and transport. They may bring local benefit, but my constituents are deeply concerned by the way decisions are taken out of the hands of local representatives. They are especially concerned that these NSIPs sit outside local plans, so that their cumulative impact is not considered when other decisions are taken. Amendment 128 would ensure oversight of national policy statements and allow Members of this House to scrutinise the Government’s approach to national projects.

Local infrastructure is also critical. In my constituency, Bicester, Kidlington and a number of villages anticipate rapid housing growth in the coming years, yet our physical and social infrastructure is already struggling to cope. My constituents want assurance that housing growth will be preceded by sufficient investment in GP surgeries, dentistry and school and college places, as well as water infrastructure, energy capacity and transport networks. New clause 46 would require local infrastructure to be completed, while new clauses 4 and 23 would ensure that water and drainage infrastructure is sufficient for development.

The Minister acknowledged in his speech that many organisations and leaders devoted to protecting nature, such as the Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Oxfordshire Wildlife Trust and, I believe, the chief executive of the RSPB, Beccy Speight, are deeply concerned by the way Ministers have characterised measures to address the nature emergency as blockers to development. The Minister disputed that, so it is disappointing that the Government have not accepted new clause 9, which would have had the modest goal of encouraging swift bricks and other measures for wildlife in new developments. I hope he will also reconsider new clause 1, which sets out the Government’s principal commitment to take all reasonable steps to avoid adverse environmental effects, and I urge the Government to accept new clause 17, which would ensure a fairer level of community benefit for new energy infrastructure projects.

At the same time, this Bill misses an opportunity to raise the environmental standards of new homes. I welcome the Minister’s commitment at the weekend that new homes will have solar panels by default, and the tribute he paid to my hon. Friend Max Wilkinson for campaigning on that issue. However, I regret that the Government have not accepted new clause 2, which would have set a zero carbon standard for new homes.

The Minister and I have frequently discussed the written ministerial statement of December 2023 under the previous Administration, which undermined the effort of West Oxfordshire district council in my constituency to set a low carbon standard for the development of Salt Cross. I appreciate that he may not accept new clause 2, but will he at least agree today to withdraw that written ministerial statement and to release the development of high-quality homes that will be good for the environment and good for their new residents?