Government working paper - streamlining major infrastructure planning

Released by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government on 26 January 2025, the working paper invites initial views regarding proposals for streamlining the consenting regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) in England. The Government’s desire for change in this regard is driven by a concern that the current NSIPs regime is not fit for purpose, particularly in light of its aim to issue 150 major infrastructure decisions before the end of the current parliament.

The paper acknowledges that the performance of the NSIP’s regime (through which most major infrastructure projects have been consented since 2010) has deteriorated in recent years, with the average time for a project to secure development consent rising from 2.6 years in 2012 to 4.2 years in 2021. 

The paper, feedback to which will inform the next stage of policy development, proposes options for: 

Better, clearer and stronger national policy statements

The Government is proposing to update national policy statements (NPSs) at least once every 5 years to ensure that evolving priorities and policies are captured in a timely fashion.

Additionally, the introduction of a more streamlined process for making intermittent changes to NPSs is proposed, particularly for updates that respond to legislative changes, government policy updates, or relevant court decisions.

Protecting the role of consultation in the consenting process while making it less burdensome

Under the current regime, applicants must publicise their proposals and consult with specified bodies before submitting their applications for development consent. Where compulsory acquisition powers are being sought, there's an additional requirement to consult with owners, lessees, tenants and occupiers of the land to be subject to those powers, as well as anyone who would be entitled to make a claim for compensation for the depreciation in the value of their interest in land not compulsorily acquired, resulting from the physical effects of the construction or operation of the scheme (known as ‘Category 3’ persons). The applicant is also required to prepare and submit a statement of community consultation setting out how consultation will be undertaken locally, which must then be adhered to throughout the process. 

The Government’s view is that these consultation requirements often lead to applicants undertaking excessive consultation, and present little incentive for issues to be resolved proactively at the pre-application stage. Over time (in combination with other factors) this has led to a significant increase in the average timeline for the pre-application stage (from the inception meeting to the submission of the application). 

In order to address these concerns, the Government is proposing to: 

1. amend the Planning Act 2008 to change the application acceptance requirements in a manner which supports the Planning Inspectorate to make outcome based judgements by taking the Government’s wider infrastructure objectives (among other considerations) into account
2. introduce a new duty on all parties to identify and narrow areas of disagreement during the pre-application stage
3. revise the contents requirements of consultation reports to support a concise approach, reduce the length of the document, and make them more accessible  
4. remove the requirement to consult ‘category 3’ persons (who will be made aware of the project through wider community consultation and notices) at the pre-application stage, with the requirement to consult them only arising once the final scope of the development is known. 

The Government is of the view that these proposals would allow for more targeted and proportionate consultation and reporting, with a view to reducing delays within the NSIP system.  

Supporting delivery of infrastructure post-consent

The Government is keen to ensure that any additional permissions and consents required in connection with an NSIP are able to be secured in parallel with the development consent order (DCO) process (rather than sequentially as is often the case at present) in order to accelerate delivery. To facilitate this, the Government is looking to encourage the use of the rarely used section 150 of the Planning Act 2008, which provides that an NSIP application may remove requirements to secure further consents or authorisations (subject to the consent of the body that would grant such further consent or authorisation). It's also considering extending the types of licences that are capable of deemed grant where a DCO is confirmed (as is currently the case with marine licences, for example). The Government is hopeful that this will facilitate delivery of the ‘one-stop-shop’ initially envisioned at the inception of the NSIPs regime.

The paper also envisages allowing for ‘common sense’ corrections and amendments to DCOs following confirmation, in order to minimise the administrative burden of correcting minor typographical errors.  

The Government is considering a dual approach in this regard. In the first instance, it's envisaged that the Secretary of State will publish a “draft order” alongside their decision letter, following which a two-week window will be introduced for applicants to propose minor corrections (limited to typographical and referencing errors) before the final DCO is published – negating the need to instigate the official change process to deal with minor errors.  

Secondly, the paper envisages removing the distinction between ‘material’ and ‘non-material’ changes to a DCO and replacing this with a single change process to capitalise on opportunities to improve granted orders and to reduce delays to project delivery. 

Creating a more flexible regime

The paper expresses concern regarding the limitations of the current ‘one size fits all’ approach to NSIP consenting and seeks views as to whether the regime is too rigid in its current form.

Presently, in order to qualify as an NSIP and enter the DCO regime, a project must meet certain statutorily prescribed thresholds which essentially determine whether a project is significant enough to require development consent from the relevant Secretary of State (rather than planning permission from the local planning authority). Where a project meets these thresholds it must be examined via the DCO process. The Secretary of State has the power to amend the relevant thresholds on a case-by-case basis in order to bring other projects into the remit of the NSIP consenting process, but there is no corresponding power available to exempt projects from the NSIPs regime. 

Because the DCO process is procedurally complex and onerous, some developers (such as solar developers) are deliberately developing schemes which fall just below the established thresholds in order to avoid consenting the scheme via the DCO process. The paper acknowledges this trend and notes that this is suboptimal in the context of achieving its climate change objectives.  

In order to address this, the Government is considering introducing flexibility for NSIPs to be progressed through alternative consenting routes (such as the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, Highways Act 1980 or the Transport and Works Act 1992) where this is deemed appropriate by the Secretary of State (to be considered on a case-by-case basis, with criteria to be published in this regard to afford greater certainty to applicants). The paper identifies a number of project types which could potentially benefit from variations to the standard process such as: a cluster of NSIPs in one region, and complex, and lengthy linear schemes (such as electricity grid or transport schemes) – and seeks views in this regard. 

Strengthening statutory guidance 

To support the proposed changes summarised above, the paper proposes introducing greater power for the Secretary of State to make statutory guidance across the whole consenting process under the Planning Act 2008. It's hoped that this will afford greater clarity at all stages of the NSIPs process. 

Updating transport consenting regimes

Finally, the paper acknowledges that amendments will need to be made to infrastructure consenting under the Highways Act 1980 and the Transport and Works Act 1992 to support the delivery of key infrastructure projects, such as introducing powers to enable the temporary possession of land and implementing statutory deadlines to provide certainty to stakeholders and streamline the process (amongst others).

The paper concludes with a request for views on the contents of the paper generally and relation to a list of questions encompassing the Government’s proposals set out above.  

The paper can be found by clicking this link.

Our content explained