Blog

The Planning and Infrastructure Bill: What happens when detail is deferred?

14 May 2025
A view of pylons stretching across the fields in Nottinghamshire. © Adobe Stock
A view of pylons stretching across the fields in Nottinghamshire. © Adobe Stock

The Hansard Society has long raised concerns about the Government's increasing tendency to present undeveloped legislation that lacks detailed policy and grants ministers broad delegated powers to fill in the gaps later. This practice undermines effective parliamentary scrutiny, by preventing MPs and Peers from fully assessing how powers may be used, (or misused), in the future. The weak system for overseeing delegated legislation—especially in the Commons—exacerbates the problem. Several powers in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill currently before Parliament highlight these ongoing issues.

Matthew England, Researcher, Hansard Society
,
Researcher, Hansard Society

Matthew England

Matthew England
Researcher, Hansard Society

Matt joined the Hansard Society in 2023 to focus on the Society’s ongoing research into delegated powers and the system of scrutiny for delegated legislation. He also maintains the Society’s legislative monitoring service, the Statutory Instrument Tracker®. He graduated with a BA in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics from the University of Oxford in 2020 and an MSc in Political Theory from the London School of Economics and Political Science in 2021. Before joining the Hansard Society, Matt worked as a researcher for a Member of Parliament focusing primarily on legislative research.

Get our latest research, insights and events delivered to your inbox

Subscribe to our newsletter

We will never share your data with any third-parties.

Share this and support our work

The Planning and Infrastructure Bill proposes wide-ranging reforms to the UK’s planning regime and to the approval process for major infrastructure projects. Spanning 160 pages, it was introduced to the House of Commons on 11 March 2025, had its Second Reading debate on 24 March 2025 and is currently undergoing scrutiny in a Public Bill Committee.

Two powers in the Bill illustrate how substantive decisions are being deferred to Ministers, with the resulting legislation subject to inadequate parliamentary scrutiny: one concerning the establishment of a national scheme of delegation for planning functions, and the second concerning benefits to consumers who live in close proximity to electricity transmission infrastructure.

Planning decisions by a local authority under the current legislative framework are a committee function rather than an executive function. The Local Government Act 1972 gives councils the power to decide which committee functions are to be discharged by a committee, a sub-committee, or an officer of the council. Consequently, each council produces its own scheme of delegation, leading to inconsistency in the treatment of similar kinds of planning application in different local authorities.

Clause 46 of the Planning and Infrastructure Bill seeks to standardise the system across local councils. It will confer power on the Secretary of State to make regulations providing for a national scheme of delegation to apply to all local planning authorities, setting out which categories of planning applications should be delegated to council officers and which to planning committees. Other than a requirement to consult such persons as the Secretary of State considers appropriate, there are no qualifications or conditions on the use of the power. As drafted, the power could be used to delegate all decisions to council officers or reserve all decisions to planning committees. This ambiguity makes it difficult for Parliament to meaningfully assess the implications of the provision. As the Local Government Association has said, “without knowing the details of what the scheme’s content might look like, it is difficult to comment on the substance of this clause.”

The Government recently published a Working Paper on Modernising Planning Committees, consulting on three possible models for a national scheme, namely:

  • delegating planning decisions to an officer where an application complies with a development plan;

  • delegating all planning decisions to officers by default, except for applications which involve departures from the development plan; or

  • delegating all planning decisions to officers by default, except for applications which meet a specified list of exceptions.

The Explanatory Notes accompanying the Bill briefly refer to the fact that the Working Paper has been published, but the three potential models that are the subject of the consultation are not mentioned in the Bill’s Explanatory Notes or Delegated Powers Memorandum.

Good legislative practice requires that consultations on important aspects of policy should be conducted and evaluated before the implementing legislation is drafted and presented to Parliament. Any Government has a limited amount of legislative time in a Parliament to achieve its objectives, and bills produced in the first session of a new Government are always likely to be a little undercooked in terms of policy development. However, if a consultation that is already underway points to a clear policy direction, then Parliament should be told; the supporting documents accompanying the Bill should reflect that information.

However, the Government defends the delegation (in the Delegated Powers Memorandum) not by arguing that the policy detail is subject to consultation, but that the scheme’s details are complex and technical and therefore best left to regulations which will include “secondary policy detail to give effect to the changes made by the Act”. In effect, Ministers are asking Parliament to give them a blank cheque to decide what form a national scheme should take when they have made the decision.

The Bill prescribes that any regulations will be subject to the negative scrutiny procedure, meaning that no parliamentary debate or vote will be required before the provisions come into force. The Government has said that any regulations will be subject to a statutory consultation, in addition to the consultation on the Working Paper. If the provisions are sufficiently important to be the subject of two consultations, they are likely to be of significant public and political interest to MPs and Peers. However, unless the regulations are ‘prayed’ against by the Leader of the Opposition, it is very unlikely that MPs will be able to debate them.

This highlights a core flaw in the delegated legislation system: Parliament is asked to approve the level of scrutiny for future regulations before the detailed content of those regulations is even known. The Government can argue that the issues are too complex to include in the Bill, defer the actual policy decisions until later, and still set the rules for how those future decisions will be scrutinised — all without showing Parliament the detail. In effect, the Government gets to shape both the substance of the policy and the process by which it will be held to account.

That is why the Hansard Society has proposed reforms to break the link between regulations (usually in the form of a Statutory Instrument) and the scrutiny procedure assigned to them in their parent Act. Parliament should determine – through a triaging process – what form of scrutiny should apply, calibrating it according to the content of the Instrument at the time of publication, rather than anticipating what Instruments may contain years in advance.

Clause 22 of the Bill gives Ministers a power to make regulations to create a scheme offering consumer benefits – likely in the form of energy bill discounts – for households situated close to new or upgraded electricity transmission infrastructure. The Government has suggested discounts of up to £250 per year for households within 500 metres of such infrastructure.

None of the key details about the scheme – eligibility, qualifying premises, value, duration of payment, and the form in which the benefit shall be paid – appear on the face of the Bill. Instead, the Bill leaves these crucial matters to be decided later by Ministers in regulations.

Most of these decisions – such as determining who qualifies or what infrastructure is covered – will be subject to the negative scrutiny procedure, meaning they can become law without a parliamentary debate or vote to approve them. Only in three circumstances does the Bill provide for the higher threshold of the affirmative scrutiny procedure whereby both Houses of Parliament must actively debate and approve the regulations before they become law, namely if the regulations:

  • impose legal obligations on persons to pass on the benefits (known as a ‘pass-through provision’);

  • impose monetary penalties for the purposes of enforcement of the scheme; and

  • create or amend a criminal offence in connection with the unauthorised use or disclosure of information in connection with the scheme.

However, the drafting of the Bill appears in one respect to contradict an assertion made in the Delegated Powers Memorandum. At one point in the DPM, the Government suggests that regulations that make provision about the eligibility of premises will also be subject to the affirmative procedure, requiring debate and approval by both Houses. But the actual text of the Bill does not support this claim; unless the regulations also include pass-through provision, monetary penalties or changes to criminal offences, they will only face the lower scrutiny threshold.

Given the likely political and public interest in who receives these benefits, the value of the benefits, and how they are delivered, these decisions may be something that MPs and Peers will wish to debate.[1] A published policy paper setting out the core features of the proposed scheme is welcome, but it is not a substitute for embedding that detail in legislation or ensuring meaningful scrutiny of the regulations that will give it effect. But as things stand, the Government retains the freedom to shape both the content of the scheme and the level of scrutiny it will face — securing the best of both worlds for itself, while Parliament is left with limited ability to influence how these powers are ultimately used.

[1] For concerns expressed about the proposed scheme, see the written evidence submitted to the Public Bill Committee by the Campaign to Protect Rural England (PIB41). For concerns expressed about the lack of clarity around the implementation of the scheme, and particularly around who will be responsible for the administration and funding of bill discounts, out of either network companies or energy generators, see the written evidence submitted by Solar Energy UK (PIB75), Renewable Power Capital (PIB86) and RenewableUK and Scottish Renewables (PIB92).

News / Parliament Matters Bulletin: What’s coming up in Parliament this week? 30 June - 4 July 2025

MPs will vote on the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill. Motions objecting to ratification of the UK–Mauritius Agreement on the Chagos Archipelago will be debated by Peers. MPs will debate the proscription of Palestine Action. Chancellor Rachel Reeves faces MPs’ oral questions and the Defence Secretary John Healey MP faces select committee scrutiny. MPs will formally approve the continued existence of the armed forces for the next 12 months, as required annually. Consideration of the Bill to create an Armed Forces Commissioner may also be completed this week. The House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill returns to the Lords for Report Stage while Peers will also scrutinise the Renters’ Rights and the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill.

29 Jun 2025
Read more

News / What Westminster gets wrong about the NHS - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 98

We are joined this week by two guests who bring invaluable insight into the intersection of health policy and parliamentary life. Dr. Sarah Wollaston and Steve Brine – both former MPs, health policy experts, and co-hosts of the podcast Prevention is the New Cure – share their experiences of how the House of Commons handles health and social care. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

27 Jun 2025
Read more

News / Assisted dying bill: Special series #14 - MPs back assisted dying bill in historic vote - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 97

This week, we reflect on a landmark moment in UK parliamentary history: the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill has passed its Third Reading in the House of Commons, moving one step closer to legalising assisted dying in England and Wales. We are joined once again by former House of Commons Clerk Paul Evans to examine how this Private Member’s Bill navigated the political and procedural obstacles in its path and to explore what lies ahead in the House of Lords. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

21 Jun 2025
Read more

Guides / How does Parliament approve Government spending? A procedural guide to the Estimates process

In order to incur expenditure the Government needs to obtain approval from Parliament for its departmental spending plans. The annual Estimates cycle is the means by which the House of Commons controls the Government’s plans for the spending of money raised through taxation.

16 Jan 2023
Read more

Blog / What role does Parliament play in the Spending Review?

The UK Spending Review outlines how Government funds will be allocated over several years. Unlike the Budget, which raises revenue, the Review decides how it is spent. But how is it approved? What role does Parliament play if it doesn’t vote on the Review itself? This blog explores how the Spending Review works, how it differs from the Budget, and how Parliament holds the Government to account through the Estimates process.

09 Jun 2025
Read more