We need a faster and leaner consenting regime fit to address climate emergency - Sarah Baillie

The UK Government recently published a policy paper – Nationally Significant Infrastructure: action plan for reforms to the planning process – setting out plans to speed up the planning and delivery process for large-scale infrastructure projects, including offshore wind farms.

This was welcomed, especially as we know the average timeline for an offshore wind project has been in excess of a decade. But is there a danger Scotland could be left behind?

Planning and environmental policy and legislation, including related consenting decisions, are currently devolved, which has allowed different policy stances on supporting onshore wind and resisting new nuclear here to the rest of the UK.

However, whilst Scottish Ministers have executive devolution on consenting decisions for strategic and major generating or transmission projects under the Electricity Act, the Act itself, along with other energy and regulatory legislation and policy, are reserved to Westminster. Any change would need to be agreed with and driven by the UK Government passing legislation – the Scottish Parliament simply does not have the constitutional power to make those changes.

Sarah Baillie is a Partner, Addleshaw Goddard

That might or might not happen for a number of political reasons but there is now real risk this will have a potentially negative impact on project development and investment in Scotland.

National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) was adopted recently, setting out the Scottish Government's priorities and policies for the planning system to 2045 and how our approach to planning and development aims to help to achieve a net zero, sustainable Scotland. It's a long-term spatial plan, setting out where development and infrastructure is needed and recent planning reform means it.has a stronger role in informing day-to-day decision-making and in plan making.

NPF4’s foundation is based on significant weight being given to the twin global climate and nature crises. Planning authorities are to seek to realise their area's full potential for electricity and heat from renewable, low carbon and zero emission sources.

All forms of onshore and offshore renewables are supported, including emerging low-carbon and zero emissions technologies. National developments such as larger electricity generation stations and transmission infrastructure are identified along with several specific locations and key infrastructure to support the net zero transition, including ports and harbours. NPF4 does not include marine areas, but acknowledges the role of onshore development in facilitating offshore projects.

Its adoption comes in tandem with the publication of the Draft Energy Strategy and Just Transition Plan. This has three key ambitions: scaling up renewable energy production; securing continued and increased investment in a net zero economy; and delivering a fair and more secure energy system, and ambitious, transformative targets.

Ultimately we need to plan, fund and build twice as much renewable capacity by the end of the decade than has been put in place over 30 years. Are we ready to do this?

Whilst the Scottish Government should be applauded for its ambitions, how they are realised is an entirely different challenge and barriers such as delays in the consenting process, regulation and the supply chain need to be addressed.

Taking consenting, some of the world's biggest energy firms have been calling for changes for years in relation to onshore generation assets and most recently for offshore wind in the North Sea. In common with many legal jurisdictions, Scotland does not have a well-defined and dedicated legislative framework for consenting for energy projects.

Projects must navigate the existing legislative landscape that applies to each different development component and different consenting regimes also apply depending on whether electricity is produced using renewable or non-renewable input fuels, whether it is on or offshore, and its megawatt output capacity. Added to this is the shortage of planners, and under-funded consenting authorities and statutory consultees. This is important for renewable developers, operators and investors because time is money. It also depends on appetite for risk and cost exposure as larger more complex projects tend to involve more lengthy and costly processes.

Regardless of political willingness, if we truly want to be a net zero global leader we need a faster, leaner and more responsive consenting regime fit for addressing a climate emergency. Only then will planning becoming a true enabler of the net zero transition and renewables deployment that the country aspires to deliver. We cannot miss this opportunity.

Sarah Baillie is a Partner, Addleshaw Goddard