Summary

  • Two UK government documents published on 28 October set out separate routes for data-centre planning and power support. The draft planning statement gives the NSIP route an indicative 100 MW threshold; the Treasury Covenant leaves the definition of a “strategic” data centre and its added criteria for later.
  • The Covenant lists potentially consequential support, including access to capacity released from the connection queue, transfer of pre-2030 connection contracts and, for exceptionally strategic projects, temporary on-site power. Its public tests describe what projects should deliver, but the paper does not yet say which projects qualify as strategic.

On 28 October, the UK government published two documents with one shared ambition: build more data centres in Britain and connect them to power sooner. One document put a number on a planning route. The other listed a menu of state assistance, then postponed the definition of who can order from it.

The draft Data Centre National Policy Statement says the Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project process, or NSIP, is an available route for data-centre development in England. It sets an indicative 100 MW minimum threshold for inclusion. The Secretary of State would decide an application after the Planning Inspectorate examined it and sent a report. A project at that scale gets a route into national consent; it does not receive consent by arithmetic.

That distinction matters. The National Policy Statement is a consultation draft, open until 8 January 2027. The proposed threshold may change as government considers responses. A developer seeking national consent still faces examination of the project and a decision by the Secretary of State. The national route moves the final planning decision from the ordinary local-authority-led process to a ministerial decision informed by an independent examination.

Local evidence still has a place in that examination. The government’s response on streamlining infrastructure planning says guidance will encourage early engagement with communities and local authorities, and support local impact reports. The same response describes a process where the Planning Inspectorate examines the proposal before the Secretary of State decides. That is a national decision with local evidence in the file, not an automatic planning pass.

The Treasury Covenant creates a second government gate. It says all data centres are encouraged to meet five tests on energy-system costs, community benefits, environmental performance, jobs and supply chains, and security. Strategic data centres must meet the tests to qualify for additional government action. The Covenant says developers should agree Local Benefit Plans with host communities, publish energy and water figures, and make commitments around local jobs, skills and resilient access to compute.

Those tests are a public list of expectations. They do not answer the prior selection question: what makes one data centre strategic enough to receive state help? The government says it will publish the definition and additional criteria in due course. The missing fact is the entry rule for that category; its publication would show how “sufficient strategic value” is established before the power timetable changes.

The promised assistance is substantial. A new Ministerial Control Centre, chaired by the Minister for AI and supported by Treasury and energy ministers, is planned to coordinate support. The Covenant says the government will use state powers to speed planning and time to power.

For sites showing sufficient strategic value, it lists four possible moves: reserve and reallocate capacity released when other projects leave the connections queue; identify additional capacity with NESO and network companies; facilitate transfer of pre-2030 data-centre connection contracts; and develop a tightly controlled framework for temporary on-site generation where other steps cannot secure power in time.

These are stated as future government actions. The Covenant does not identify a project that has received a transfer or temporary-power permission. It also does not describe the source, consent process or conditions for each contract transfer. The document names the available levers before it names the eligible projects.

The national planning threshold and the strategic-power category answer different questions. One concerns the scale and consent route of a proposed development. The other concerns whether government should use public authority to accelerate access to scarce network capacity. A 100 MW project may seek the NSIP route under the draft policy; the published documents do not say that size alone confers strategic status or grid support.

Ofgem’s separate connection reform adds another distinction. Its consultation proposes a commitment fee and progress milestones to test whether data-centre projects can advance toward connection. As of 31 October, Ofgem’s page still marked that consultation “closed (awaiting decision).” Project readiness and strategic value are different tests, handled through separate policy tracks. A sound planning application, a credible connection schedule and a case for national priority should each leave their own evidence trail.

The government says the UK will need 6 GW of AI data-centre capacity by 2030. That is the government’s estimate of required capacity. The Covenant then promises faster and more certain delivery in return for responsible development, but it does not put a minimum figure on a “substantial” Local Benefit Plan or describe a scoring method for strategic status. Communities are promised a meaningful say in benefits while the test for selecting their project remains forthcoming.

That gap is the governance story. A public planning threshold can be debated against a published draft. A strategic label that controls access to ministers, connection capacity and exceptional temporary power needs its own public criteria. The policy has identified who will gather around the ministerial table and what tools they may use. Its next document must tell developers, communities and other grid users how a project earns a seat.

Sources: HM Treasury, The Data Centre Covenant; Draft National Policy Statement for Data Centres (PDF); NPS consultation page; Ofgem, Proposed data-centre connection reforms; Government response on streamlining infrastructure planning.; UK government, Accelerating electricity network connections for strategic demand