This Insight summarises the Planning aspirations of the Conservative, Labour and the Liberal Democrat manifestos for the UK’s 2024 election. Their shared focus is on housing, energy infrastructure and battling climate change. The Conservatives remain committed to the Green Belt and maximising brownfield and densification. Labour proposes new towns and increased use of compulsory purchase, with release of ‘grey’ belt. The Lib Dems focus on more localised strategies. Labour and the Conservatives both propose increases in offshore wind, nuclear and carbon capture, use and storage. Both resist fracking. Labour proposes new Government energy investment institutions. The Conservatives remain wary of onshore wind. The Lib Dems support nature-based solutions to the energy crisis given the imperative to tackle global warming.

The Supreme Court’s judgment in R(Finch) v Surrey County Council  [2024] UKSC 20 has potentially significant implications on how environmental impacts of major projects are assessed.  The question at the heart of the case was how far ‘downstream’ from a development project the decision-maker has to look when assessing its likely environmental effects.  The answer, according to a slim majority of the Supreme Court, is further than had previously been thought necessary.  However, it’s not panic stations for all EIA development.

Details of how the recently confirmed operational reforms to improve the NSIP planning process will work in practice are beginning to emerge. We have previously reported on which of the proposed operational reforms are confirmed, but following publication in April 2024 of various amendment regulations, new National Infrastructure Planning Guidance and PINS' launch of a new online platform, we now have a clearer understanding of the changes and how they will work in practice. 

Reducing the embodied carbon in the built environment has an important role in mitigating the effects of climate change.  However, there is no national planning policy that incorporates such considerations in the planning process. Whilst a policy shift is on the horizon, the recent High Court challenge brought by M&S following the refusal of its Oxford Street store plans brings welcome clarity on where things currently stand for demolition and rebuild proposals.  

Changes to the DCO consenting process to be introduced this spring have the potential to help applicants navigate this system with more certainty and confidence.  They introduce more flexibility into the process allowing the opportunity for applications to be processed in a way that is more appropriate and proportionate to its particular nature.

Some significant planning changes are proposed in a government consultation on ‘An Accelerated Planning System’ launched on 6 March 2024 alongside the Spring Budget (which closes on 1 May).  These proposed changes cover new processes to speed up planning decisions, details of how the new route to vary planning permissions under s73B TCPA will work and possible solutions to facilitate the operation of overlapping ‘drop-in’ permissions to prevent Hillside risks arising in large schemes.

The Government’s consultation on the siting of nuclear power stations beyond 2025 reflects the changing nuclear landscape in the UK and proposes a new approach to national planning policy that is more flexible and developer led.  This is potentially exciting for the developers and manufactures of advanced nuclear technologies such as SMRs if the new policy supports scalability and cost efficiencies.  However, whether the proposed changes will provide optimal support warrants careful consideration, as we explain in this Insight.

Included in the wide range of provisions in the Levelling Up and Regeneration Act 2023 are some important changes to the process and procedures for Development Consent Orders and Compulsory Purchase Orders. In this Insight we examine these changes and their implications for landowners and local authorities.