IEMA highlights Government proposals on streamlined infrastructure planning should not compromise environmental protections

IEMA recently responded to the UK Government’s proposals on streamlining infrastructure planning. Our response outlines how the plans need to balance efficiency with robust environmental and social safeguards and highlights the importance of modernising the planning process while ensuring that any reforms do not come at the expense of environmental protections or public trust.

IEMA supports measures that aim to reduce duplication and delays. The proposed package of reforms, including the integration of appropriate Environmental Outcomes Reports (EORs) with National Policy Statements (NPSs) and Delivery Plans, has the potential to create a more efficient assessment process. However, we caution that the reforms must be well-resourced and transparent to avoid weakening environmental protections or creating legal uncertainties.

image

We advocate for regular updates to NPSs to ensure they remain aligned with the UK’s climate and biodiversity goals. While the proposed changes could enhance policy certainty, we stress the need for clear review triggers, independent oversight, and robust stakeholder engagement, to maintain credibility. Without these safeguards, there is a risk of politicisation and inconsistent updates, which could undermine the effectiveness of the planning system.

We support streamlining public consultation processes but emphasise that efficiency must not come at the expense of meaningful community engagement. Proposals need to balance proportionality with transparency and accessibility, ensuring that underrepresented communities are not excluded. We recommend clear minimum standards for engagement and improved feedback mechanisms to demonstrate how community input shapes decisions.

Efforts to accelerate post-consent infrastructure delivery are necessary, but speed must not compromise environmental safeguards nor compliance monitoring. The proposed changes, such as more efficient discharge of planning conditions and better coordination between regulators and developers, could streamline approvals. However, there is a need for robust monitoring and enforcement mechanisms to ensure long-term project sustainability.

While we recognise the need for greater flexibility in the consenting process, we caution against introducing broad discretionary powers without clear safeguards. Any modifications to the process must be transparent, consistent, and maintain environmental protections. We recommend targeted secondary legislation and guidance to address the diverse characteristics of infrastructure projects without undermining accountability.

We recommend that reforms should be evidence-based, have robust safeguards, and involve meaningful stakeholder engagement. The proposed changes should enhance the planning process without compromising environmental protections. As the UK moves towards its net-zero and biodiversity goals, insights from a broad range of stakeholders, including IEMA, will be crucial in creating a resilient and sustainable infrastructure planning system.

To read the IEMA consultation response in full click here.

To learn more about the IEMA EIA Quality Mark click here.


Published by:
image

Rufus Howard FIEMA

Policy and Engagement Lead

Dr Howard is the policy and engagement lead for Impact Assessment at IEMA and a leading professional in EIA, with two decades of international experience across renewable energy and major infrastructure. A Fellow of IEMA and Chartered Environmentalist, Rufus holds degrees in Biodiversity Conservation and Environmental Law, and a doctorate in Management. A trusted advisor, Rufus has directed environmental projects for major organisations such as the World Bank, The Crown Estate, Natural Resources Wales, the EBRD, Statkraft, Orsted, National Grid, and the Environment Agency. Rufus lives in Kent with his wife and three daughters and enjoys walking in nature, cooking, music, kayaking and archery.