Draft National Policy Statement for National Networks

How does the draft NPS for National Networks (published in March 2023) compare with the original 2015 version, which was so positive in providing planning support for Strategic Rail Freight Interchanges? Does the new draft NPS help or hinder the development of rail freight in Great Britain?

The Planning Act 2008 significantly reformed the process by which nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs) gain planning consent. The Act legally defines a NSIP and requires relevant Government departments to produce National Policy Statements (NPS) setting out the need for and policies concerning NSIP delivery across a number of sectors, including road, rail, ports and electricity generation.

Under the Act, planning applications for NSIPs are made directly to the Planning Inspectorate (PINS). Schemes are subsequently examined by PINS with a recommendation made to the relevant Secretary of State, who determines the application based on the relevant NPS. By setting out the general needs case ahead of the application (in the relevant NPS), combined with a statutory timescale for the examination/determination process, the key aim of the Act was to simplify and shorten the process of granting consent for major infrastructure.

The NPS for National Networks was designated by Parliament in 2015. It covers NSIPs on the national road and railway networks, including the development of Strategic Rail Freight Interchanges (SRFIs) greater than 60ha in size. With respect to SRFIs, the Planning Act 2008 can be considered a successful reform from the point of view of developing rail freight as all applications considered to date have been granted consent (DIRFT Phase III, East Midlands Gateway, Northampton Gateway and West Midlands Interchange). In contrast, three SRFI schemes below the 60ha threshold, namely SIFE (Slough), Howbury Park (Dartford) and Kent International Gateway (Maidstone), were considered under the ‘old’ Town and Country Planning Act process and were subsequently refused consent following public inquiries.

Given that the NPS for National Networks was particularly supportive of SRFI development, describing the need for both sustainability and economic reasons, this success rate for SRFI planning approvals should not be too much of a surprise. Rail freight demand forecasts (originally prepared for Network Rail by MDS Transmodal) were presented, with the document concluding that ‘they confirm the need for an expanded network of SRFIs across the regions’.

In 2022 the Department for Transport (DfT) launched a review of the NPS for National Networks, in part to reflect new legislation set out in the Environment Act 2021. Following this review, a Draft NPS for National Networks was published for consultation on 14 March 2023. The consultation runs until 6 June 2023. The question to assess, therefore, is whether the Draft NPS reaches a different conclusion on the need for SRFIs, and as a result whether there are consequent implications for the development of new or expanded facilities.

Draft NPS for National Networks

The first point to note is that the Draft NPS aligns with the Future of Freight Plan, published by the DfT in June 2022. This defined a National Freight Network across road, rail, ports and logistics warehousing (i.e. including SRFIs), and should help identify the infrastructure needed to support an integrated network that facilitates modal shift.

An overarching ‘Drivers of Need’ section initially sets out the need for the development of the national networks. Five categories are identified covering network performance, economic growth, resilience, net-zero and safety. Similar to the 2015 NPS there is a ‘Drivers of Need’ section relating specifically to SRFIs, albeit it has been substantially re-drafted from the current version. Four ‘drivers’ are described, namely network performance and resilience, user needs, connectivity and supporting economic growth, and environment.

It states that SRFIs are now an important part of the logistics infrastructure, that they reduce the cost of users moving rail freight and are a key element in aiding modal shift. The document notes that ‘there may be a greater demand for both an updated network of SRFIs and interchanges in new locations’ to support the needs of users. Overall, it reaches the same conclusions as the 2015 NPS, namely that:

•  A network of SRFIs is needed across all regions to serve regional, sub-regional and cross-regional markets; and

• There is a compelling need for an expanded network of SRFIs.

Despite these positive endorsements, two issues are noteworthy which potentially weakens the overall case made for SRFIs. Firstly, the ‘Drivers of Need’ do not include any demand forecasts to underpin the case presented, whereas the 2015 NPS included the most recent iteration of Network Rail’s freight forecasts, alongside the statement that ‘they confirm the need for an expanded network of SRFIs’.

Network Rail has recently received new demand forecasts from MDS Transmodal for 2028/9, and work on longer-term forecasts is now progressing. The long anticipated rail freight growth target is due to be published this autumn. It maybe that the final version of the updated NPS, when designated, will include either these forecasts or make reference to the growth target. It would strengthen the conclusion and case presented overall.

Secondly, there is clearly encouragement in the draft NPS to see new SRFIs or smaller rail freight interchange schemes developed in regions where such facilities have yet to be consented and built. This should be welcomed from the point of view of developing rail freight, particularly for the North West and London/South East regions alongside more peripheral areas such as the West Country.  Noting the successful schemes in the Midlands, it states that to meet the Government’s ambitions for rail freight growth, there remains a need for appropriately located SRFIs across all regions.

However, Paragraph 3.108 states that ‘Consideration should be given to ensuring existing SRFI locations are taken into account when making an application, to ensure that SRFIs are strategically located and thus enable a cross-country network’. Acknowledging that large warehouses naturally cluster in the Midlands (for well-understood logistical reasons), it continues by stating ‘consideration should be given to proposals for SRFIs in areas where there is currently lesser provision’. It is hoped that this will not preclude the development of further SRFIs in the Midlands, where there is clearly strong demand for new large-scale logistics warehousing (and for the sustainability and economic reasons outlined in the draft NPS, a substantial proportion should be rail-served). While the wording leaves open this possibility, it also ignores how supply chains currently operate and the aims of the NPS itself to create a network, given that new strategically located SRFIs in the Midlands would complement (and naturally serve) new interchanges in other regions where provision currently does not exist.

Finally, the document notes that for any NSIP application accepted for examination by PINS before the Draft NPS is designated by Parliament, the 2015 NPS (and its contents) will continue to have effect. However, Paragraph 1.17 also states that any emerging draft NPS is potentially capable of being an important and relevant consideration, with the extent of its relevance being a matter for the Secretary of State. This position therefore applies to the Hinckley Rail Freight Interchange scheme, which was submitted to PINS in 17 March.