Green Party councillors, including Bildeston's Robert Lindsay, fear for the future of planning controls and environmental protections after Suffolk County Council proposed low-tax, low-regulation zones at 12 Suffolk developments.

Suffolk County Council, in partnership with district and borough councils, submitted an expression of interest in the government's offer of areas with reduced taxes for businesses and planning requirements last Friday.

While leader of the county council, Cllr Matthew Hicks, expects the initiative to bring "regeneration and growth" to local businesses, the Green-led opposition believes many will be negatively impacted.

Cllr Lindsay, deputy leader of the Green, Independent and Liberal Democrat group and Babergh district councillor, said: " Suffolk has oodles of potential to attract entrepreneurial professionals: people who might want to move out of expensive cities like London or Cambridge to start anew with a greener, more pleasant lifestyle.

"In order to attract them, we believe Suffolk's local authorities need to prioritise making our towns and villages pleasant places for people to live, rather than bribe businesses by giving up local democratic powers and handing out perks and tax havens.

"The Hamilton Road area is right in the centre of Sudbury, immediately next to the conservation area that includes much of the town.

"Is Babergh Council really so desperate to develop the site that it is prepared to give up its own planning powers and accept the likelihood that environmental and biodiversity controls are eliminated?

"At Chilton Woods, what will the new residents of the huge Taylor Wimpey estate being built there make of a tax-free haven for businesses right next door, where those businesses can seemingly bypass local environmental and planning controls?

"The same applies to people living around Copdock on the edge of Ipswich, faced with tax havens for industry on their doorstep. What will this do to the economy of Ipswich town centre?"

Cllr Lindsay plans to ask councillors about their continued support for the investment zones if environmental and planning protections are found to be threatened at a Suffolk County Council meeting on Thursday.

Cllr Andrew Stringer, leader of the county's Green, Liberal Democrat and Independent group of councillors, said: "These zones will create tax-free spots, which will put the many and diverse Suffolk businesses not lucky enough to be in the zone at a competitive disadvantage.

"Either they will have to pay taxes to help support those in the zones or they will be forced to relocate there themselves, hollowing out the economy of the rest of Suffolk.

"It appears that local planning and environmental controls will be either removed or seriously eroded in these zones.

"There may well be nothing to insist, for example, that a business is built sustainably with such vital controls as solar panels, high quality insulation and thought for wildlife.

"By eroding such protections, these zones would run counter to Suffolk councils' zero carbon by 2030 goals.

"Suffolk councils should have politely declined this offer. Other councils like Oxfordshire have done just this because they fear this is half-baked."

Suffolk County Council declared a climate emergency and pledged to become carbon neutral by 2030 in 2019.

The investment zone proposal by the government includes tax incentives expected to last for ten years.

The government is currently considering relieving business rates, stamp duty land tax and employer national insurance contributions in these areas – as well as increasing capital allowances and structures and buildings allowance.

The 12 sites proposed for investment zone status include Hamilton Road Quarter, Chilton Woods and Delphi Site in Sudbury.

Alongside the Sudbury sites, the Suffolk areas earmarked to be investment zones are Eastern Gateway, Europa Way, Hadleigh Road and Seven Hills in Ipswich, as well as Suffolk Business Park in Bury St Edmunds, West Mildenhall, Haverhill Town Centre, Land adjacent to Copdock Interchange, and Lowestoft's Inner and Outer Harbour.

None of the proposed sites include land that is greenfield or adjacent to areas of outstanding natural beauty, and all have been supported by Suffolk's MPs.