New National Planning Policy Framework Lends Support to Broadband and Mobile

The Government has published its new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) for England, which finally appears to have laid the foundations for planning authorities to give “substantial weight” to the benefits of “maintaining or improving network coverage, capacity, reliability and resilience” of modern gigabit broadband and 5G mobile networks.

The NPPF is designed to set out a foundation for how the government’s policies for plan-making and for making decisions on development proposals in England are expected to be applied. Mobile operators in particular have long called for an updated policy that clearly prioritises telecommunications infrastructure, ideally by helping to reduce the number of applications requiring full planning or prior approval to ease pressure on local authorities and their own plans (here and here).

However, despite their lobbying, the government’s Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 largely seemed to ignore mobile networks, preferring instead to focus on other sectors, such as energy, housing and transport. But the recent 10-Year UK Infrastructure Strategy (10YIS) did signal a change by pledging to “remove barriers to digital infrastructure deployment“.

The government have since followed up their 10YIS commitment by publishing a related consultation (here), which proposed a variety of possible changes to the planning system for digital networks. All of this is also occurring alongside the ongoing Mobile Market Review (summary), which aims to ensure that existing mobile network policy and regulatory frameworks are updated to support investment, innovation, competition and consumers.

What’s changed with the new NPPF

The Government has now published its new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) for England and it appears to have adopted one of the key asks from mobile operators, with the industry trade body, Mobile UK, celebrating the inclusion of definitive language instructing decision-makers that “substantial weight should be given to the benefits of maintaining or improving coverage, capacity, reliability, and resilience.”

“This guidance is a necessary step forward. It equips local authorities and planners with a clear mandate to support mobile deployments, reducing costly planning delays and ensuring communities across the UK can access world-class 4G and 5G connectivity when and where they need it most,” said Mobile UK in a statement.

Extract from the NPPF’s Telecoms Section

Supporting high quality communications

The objective of the policies in this chapter is to support the expansion and upgrading of telecommunications infrastructure, in ways which limit an unnecessary proliferation of equipment and respect important environmental safeguards. Advanced, high quality and reliable communications are essential to meet changing technological, social, business and security requirements (including through delivering coverage of higher quality standalone 5G in all populated areas by 2030, and nationwide gigabit-capable broadband by 2032).

National decision-making policies

CO1: Proposals for telecommunications infrastructure

1. In considering proposals for the expansion or upgrading of electronic telecommunications networks, substantial weight should be given to the benefits of maintaining or improving network coverage, capacity, reliability and resilience, including where significant improvements are required such as along rail corridors. This includes, but is not limited to, providing for next generation wireless technologies (such as standalone 5G), gigabit-capable broadband connections and supporting infrastructure such as fibre exchanges.

Proposals for such development should:

a. Use existing masts, buildings and other structures already employed for this purpose, upgrade, or replace existing infrastructure, unless there is no reasonable opportunity to do so (taking into consideration meeting consumer needs, the efficient operation of the network and providing reasonable capacity for future expansion);

b. Be sited and designed to minimise the visual impact of the proposals, especially in situations where a new site or structure is proposed, so far as practical taking into account its operational requirements;

c. Not result in cumulative exposure to non-ionising radiation exceeding International Commission guidelines when the development is operational; and

d. Not cause significant and irremediable interference with other electrical equipment, air traffic services or instrumentation operated in the national interest.

2. In assessing proposals for telecommunications infrastructure, local planning authorities should not require minimum distances to be maintained between telecommunications infrastructure and other development, seek to prevent competition between different operators, question the need for the expansion or upgrading of telecommunications networks, or use health safeguarding standards different from the International Commission guidelines on non-ionising radiation protection.

CO2: Supporting information for telecommunications infrastructure proposals

1. Development proposals for electronic telecommunications infrastructure (including applications for prior approval under the General Permitted Development Order, as amended) should be supported by the following, where relevant:

a. Information on the outcome of pre-submission consultation with organisations with an interest in the proposed development (in particular with the relevant body where a mast is to be installed near a school or college, or within a statutory safeguarding zone surrounding an aerodrome, technical site or military explosives storage area;

b. Where a new site is proposed, evidence that the applicant has sought to keep the number of these to a minimum in accordance with policy CO1(1)(a). This should include evidence that the possibility of erecting any antennas on an existing building, mast or other structure has been explored; and

c. Evidence demonstrating compliance with policy CO1(1)(c) and (d), including a statement that self-certifies that the cumulative exposure, when operational, will not exceed International Commission guidelines on non-ionising radiation protection.

However, there will no doubt continue to be a trade-off between regulation, urban constraints, and competing public interests. Mobile infrastructure isn’t installed in a vacuum and planning authorities still have to consider public opinion, visual impact, safety and other factors etc. Lest we also forget the fact that planning authorities often suffer from a lack of resources, which arguably remains a bigger problem.

Meanwhile, Mobile UK continues to call for other complementary changes, such as reform of Permitted Development Rights, a resolution to the rules around Notices to Quit on mobile sites (i.e. landowners forcing mobile operators off their land before alternative sites can be found), and completion of the Mobile Market Review. Balancing all of the competing interests involved here remains a pretty big challenge.