Skip to content

Outrage at government response to ‘Save our Green Belt’ petition

9th September 2025

CPRE Hertfordshire has already gained over 17,000 signatures supporting our national petition to restore Green Belt protections in national planning policy. But we are outraged following the government’s response that they will not review the definition of ‘grey belt’.

The revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) published in December 2024 contains inconsistencies between the NPPF paragraphs on the Green Belt and the NPPF glossary definition of ‘grey belt’.

Initially ‘grey belt’ was described as poor-quality Green Belt land like disused car parks and derelict petrol stations. But the actual ‘grey belt’ definition in the revised NPPF removes vital Green Belt protections and is so expansive that ‘grey belt’ could include almost any Green Belt land.

This allows – and indeed encourages – developers to submit planning applications arguing that their site is ‘grey belt’ regardless of the true characteristics of the site.

In response, we launched a nationwide petition calling on the government to amend the definition of ‘grey belt’ and restore protections for the Green Belt in the NPPF.

The government must respond once a petition reaches 10,000 signatures and our petition passed this threshold in August. But the government’s response to our petition dismisses our concerns, reiterates their earlier comments on prioritising brownfield land for development, and states unequivocally that they will not amend or update the definition of ‘grey belt’.

Read the government response in full

Note – scroll down on the government’s petition webpage to read the full response.

Here in Hertfordshire, in the year since the government first consulted on the concept of ‘grey belt’ there have been at least 45 planning applications for development on sites within the Green Belt, where the applicant has argued that the land is ‘grey belt’. These are not disused car parks or derelict petrol stations or other brownfield land. Instead, these sites equate to over 700 hectares of Hertfordshire’s countryside.

'We are disappointed that the Government will not provide clarity and consistency on the ‘grey belt’ definition in the NPPF. Our green spaces in every pocket of the countryside are currently under threat due to this ambiguity. We were originally told by the Government that grey belt meant land like derelict car parks but what we are seeing on the ground is a constant stream of planning applications on green fields and meadows in the Green Belt – a haven for nature and humans alike.'
Abby Coften, Chief Executive of CPRE Hertfordshire

We are seeing new, speculative planning applications literally every week now, where the developer claims the land is ‘grey belt’. So our campaign is more urgent than ever, and we will press on with our petition to save the Green Belt, aiming for 100,000 signatures to prompt a debate in Parliament.

Sign the petition here before the deadline of 14 November and help save our green spaces.

Sign our petition

One of the many sites in Hertfordshire for which a developer is arguing 'grey belt' CPRE Hertfordshire