ipb banner

Infrastructure Planning Blog

40: A conference and another revocation

This week's blog covers a timely conference on NSIPs practice and another example of a Development Consent Order being revoked.

Hello PIA, goodbye PEIR

I attended the first day of the Waterfront NSIPs Forum, which I believe to be the 14th iteration of this annual two-day event, and my colleague Will Massa attended the second day. Although the agenda remains quite similar year-to-year, the content is very much up to the minute and useful for DCO practitioners.  This year the broad theme was the implementation of the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 (PIA) and particularly the abolition of statutory consultation and the need for a preliminary environmental information report (PEIR), which was broadly welcomed.  There was general urging that guidance for consultation for when it becomes non-statutory is needed very soon so that applicants don't end up defaulting to the old system because they can't prepare in time even when the new powers come into force.

Artificial intelligence is a great opportunity but also needs careful use. It can be used by applicants if properly acknowledged and explained, and is increasingly being used by objectors to projects. Doug Johnson of SEC Newgate (and blog Christmas quiz winner) presented on the world after statutory consultation and live on air loaded a project summary document into ChatGPT (Longfield Solar, I think it was, although this would apply to any project) and asked it to write an objection to the project. In 20 seconds it had written 1000 words. Impressive? Not really, the objection is very generic and doesn't reflect any particular concerns of the person requesting it.  If objections are written by AI then presumably it is legitimate for applicants to use AI to summarise them.  At least the duty to have regard to representations is on the way out.

On examination experience, Natural England got criticised for not attending hearings; their defence was resourcing issues, despite the ability to charge being introduced in April 2024. Overlapping hearings (rare but they happen) are a real problem for interested parties.

National Grid are inheriting the crown of most repeat applications from National Highways and were definitely on top of continual lesson learning, coordination and avoiding consultation fatigue. I liked the analogy from Anglian Water that a DCO team may be the equivalent of excellent musicians but the orchestra of them all playing together needs to be harmonious.

Three strikes and they're out

On 14 November 2025 the historic first revocation of a Development Consent Order (DCO) - for the Morpeth to Ellingham project - took place. There was subsequently consultation on revoking the Stonehenge tunnel (A303 (Amesbury to Berwick Down)) DCO but it does not appear to have been revoked yet - maybe it won't be depending on the result of the consultation.  Now a consultation on revoking a third highway DCO has been launched, this time for the A47 Wansford to Sutton project near Peterborough. A statement had been made on 8 July 2025 saying that the project was not going ahead. The consultation runs until 25 March.

Why bother revoking DCOs, I hear you ask? There are quite a few private sector ones that have not progressed, whose powers have now lapsed and which were never revoked. I think that it is in good order to revoke DCOs that contain compulsory acquisition powers that are not going to be used but are still hanging over landowners. The Wansford ones last for five years so until March 2028. There is also the issue of blight claims, which were specifically referenced in the decision to revoke the Morpeth to Ellingham DCO, which would have placed a continuing burden on the public purse.

Keeping up with the Joneses

If you are interested in the new parallel regime emerging in Wales, we have a separate blog entry on that which you can find here.

This publication is intended for general guidance and represents our understanding of the relevant law and practice as at February 2026. Specific advice should be sought for specific cases. For more information see our terms & conditions.

No items found.

No items found.

Date published
27 Feb 2026

Sign up to the mailing list to receive the Infrastructure Planning Blogs

Abstract overlapping curved shapes in varying shades of violet and purple on a solid violet background.

Legal insights & events

Keep up to date on the issues that matter.

Abstract yellow background with overlapping translucent olive green curved shapes.

Follow us

Find us on social media

No items found.