COMMENT The UK government has made commendable strides in positioning the country as a prime destination for global capital. Initiatives led by investment minister Poppy Gustafsson and UK head of investor relations Gus Wiseman have been instrumental in strengthening investor confidence. However, their efforts are being undermined by a fragmented and inconsistent planning system that requires urgent reform to become more efficient, transparent and supportive of inward investment.
The recent development of Court Lane Industrial Estate in Iver, Buckinghamshire, serves as a cautionary tale. This site was designated for a state-of-the-art 700,000 sq ft, 140MW data centre –classified as “critical infrastructure” due to the surging demand for data driven by AI, cloud computing and e-commerce.
Although central government backed the project, with the secretary of state intervening to grant planning approval, progress did not materialise as the local planning authority delayed National Grid’s application for a new substation – essential to power the data centre and other high-value major developments.
We welcome the fact that Buckinghamshire has now approved the substation application, with a clear majority vote of 10 in favour and none against. This was the right outcome, but the process has been slow and uncertain.
Lack of certainty
This lengthy and disjointed approach highlights a major issue: the time lag between planning approvals for interconnected infrastructure creates unnecessary delays, which in turn deters investors.
In this case, securing planning permission for the data centre took years, only for the power supply approval to face further delays. For global investors, like the one who agreed to acquire the site subject to planning approval, such uncertainty makes the UK a less attractive destination for capital.
A fundamental problem is that decision-making often sits at the wrong level of government. Local councillors and to a lesser extent planning officers sometimes lack the necessary training, specialist knowledge and time to assess the complexities of large-scale infrastructure projects. They are tasked with making highly technical decisions and are conflicted by local interests that should be evaluated in the broader context of national economic priorities.
This is not a criticism of the dedication of hardworking councillors and officers but an observation of a system that inadvertently creates a bottleneck where critical projects are stalled – not due to a lack of national policy direction, but because the planning system does not equip local authorities with the right expertise or mechanism to escalate decisions when needed.
Joined-up thinking
To encourage greater investment including international capital, the UK must adopt a more joined-up, rational and well-resourced planning framework.
Central government must ensure local planning decisions are better aligned with national economic goals. While democratic decision-making at a local level is important, there are cases – such as critical infrastructure projects – where the national significance is too great for decisions to rest solely with local authorities. Some planning applications are too politically challenging for local councils to navigate, leading to delays that prevent economic progress.
Gustafsson and Wiseman’s exemplary work to attract capital to Britain would be significantly bolstered by a planning framework that moves as fast as the investors we seek to attract. The entire structure of decision-making – spanning from Whitehall to local councils – must operate with a shared pro-investment mindset.
Mischa Davis is managing director at Patrizia
Image © Ismail Enes Ayhan/Unsplash
Follow Estates Gazette
