A new road

Government rhetoric has been unequivocal. In his 2024 Plan for Change speech, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said, “We haven’t built a reservoir for over 30 years, and even the projects we do approve are fought tooth and nail… until you end up with the absurd spectacle of a £100 million bat tunnel holding up the country’s single biggest infrastructure project.”

That rhetoric has been followed by strategy and policy decisions. The 10 Year Infrastructure Strategy is the first to bring together economic infrastructure (transport, energy and water) with social infrastructure (housing, schools and hospitals). The Planning and Infrastructure Bill (The Bill) (discussed later) cuts across a range of property sectors.

INFRASTRUCTURE ACROSS THE UK

A Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) is a large-scale development that meets the thresholds set by the Planning Act 2008, in sectors such as energy, transport, and wastewater. NSIPs require a development consent order (DCO); a unified consent that replaces the need for multiple permissions. DCOs are examined by an independent Examining Authority through the Planning Inspectorate (PINS), with final decisions made by the Secretary of State.

In Wales, PINS also handles NSIPs, such as energy projects over 350 MW. The Planning (Wales) Act 2015 introduced Developments of National Significance, determined by Welsh Ministers, with Planning and Environmental Decisions Wales providing examination and recommendations.

In Scotland, planning applications are submitted to local authorities within a development hierarchy: National, Major, and Local. Onshore and offshore energy projects over 50 MW are consented under Section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 by Scottish Ministers.

Putting policy into practice

The government aims to finalise decisions on 150 major infrastructure projects before the next general election. Savills Research has analysed the list of major projects within the Planning Inspectorate register of DCO applications. Around six in ten (62%) of applications are resolved (see Figure 4). Twenty-two of those have been decided upon since 5 July 2024, when Labour won the election, and so could be counted towards the target. A further 100 are unresolved at the time of writing. Even with all of these, the government appears to be 28 projects short of its 150-project target.

It takes over 600 days for a successful application to receive approval, more than the 16 months outlined in Planning Inspectorate guidance. Add to this the estimated two years taken to navigate the pre-application process, and the government’s target is looking increasingly ambitious.

Most of the delay emerges where no stipulation is made on how long a stage is permitted to take, namely the pre-examination (an additional 46 days) and decision (a further 35 days). These averages disguise a great degree of variability. The shortest timeline took little more than a year. The longest? Almost five. In projects that take more than 1,000 days, the time taken to make a decision has increased the most (Figure 5).

IS NATURE THE PROBLEM?

According to the government fact sheet for the proposed Nature Restoration Fund (NRF), current environmental regulations have created challenges for development. The NRF aims to address this by permitting developers to contribute to a central fund for nature restoration, rather than implementing mitigation measures independently. Additionally, a separate consultation suggests delaying Biodiversity Net Gain requirements for NSIPs by six months to May 2026.

Environmental regulations can play a role in planning delays, though their overall influence varies. Reforms in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill already aim to reduce all objections deemed without merit (see ‘Not without teeth’ below). In 2024, approximately 3.3% of planning appeal decisions in England cited bats or newts as relevant factors, but an estimated 160,000 new homes are affected by the nutrient neutrality issue. Rather than over-generalising, it would be more effective to focus on known bottlenecks to create proportionate and effective legislation.

Back to the future

When the Planning Act 2008 was introduced, it was the Infrastructure Planning Commission’s (IPC) role to examine and decide applications. An amendment by the coalition government in 2010 introduced an additional step that gave the Secretary of State (SoS) the final say. The IPC was then abolished, and the administration of the process passed to the Planning Inspectorate. This adds to the workload of the SoS’s team and introduces a political dimension to the decision-making process.

If the government returned to the previous policy, the main impediment to major infrastructure decisions could be removed. Politicians would still be able to influence infrastructure decisions; this is the reason the Act simultaneously introduced National Policy Statements. While these were always to be reviewed regularly, reform means they are now to be reviewed every five years to provide greater clarity on government wishes. Changing responsibilities would greatly aid the government in hitting its 150-project target.

Not without teeth

The Bill is still likely to accelerate decisions. At present, a project can be substantially delayed by objections that possess little merit. For example:

1. A High Court judge may deny permission to appeal based on initial documentation
   
   
2. If denied, the claimant can then ask for reconsideration at a High Court oral hearing
   
   
3. If refused at the oral hearing, the claimant may request permission from the Court of Appeal
   
   

Even if a High Court judge finds the initial submission to be “totally without merit”, the claimant can still appeal for a review of the paper submission by the Court of Appeal.

The Bill introduces two main changes. It eliminates the first stage, replacing it with oral hearings for all cases. It also removes the right of appeal for cases deemed “totally without merit”. In addition, planning inspectors can now award costs against parties submitting frivolous objections to deter such actions in the first place.

Before the beginning

A pre-application consultation is required by law. Any changes to the project then trigger the requirement to re-consult. As such, two years are typically dedicated to the pre-application stage, with some developers choosing to consult even before the required pre-application consultation to reduce issues later on.

Changes will remove the legal requirement, but this will not see developers set free to bulldoze and build with abandon, because the change brings the DCO process in line with other planning regimes in this regard. Developers will still have obligations to the environment; this change merely removes the duplication of those requirements.

Reform is therefore improving the planning situation, but getting the pre-application stage correct is essential, even with recent reforms. The DCO process is fundamentally inflexible, with little time and room for error. Until more reform is undertaken to de-litigate and simplify the process, the expertise and experience of professionals will remain essential to ensure projects are designed correctly and protected against so-called 'lawfare'.

Changes to compulsory purchase powers

At the time of writing, the Planning and Infrastructure Bill will seek to delegate compulsory purchase order (CPO) powers. Local planning authorities will be able to decide on some CPOs themselves, but only where the development includes affordable housing and no objections have been raised.

A key proposal is to limit 'hope value' in compensation, which refers to the hypothetical increase in land value based on potential future development. Currently, hope value must always be considered and can only be disregarded with the approval of a government minister.

The Government plans to allow inspectors to approve CPOs made under the New Towns Act 1981, including those that remove hope value, replacing the need for ministerial approval. Hope value limitations will only apply to developments including social or affordable housing.

_{Read the articles within Spotlight: UK Infrastructure below.}