Industry trade body Mobile UK, which represents EE, O2 and VodafoneThree (Vodafone and Three UK), has warned that the UK’s ambition to become an “AI superpower” will struggle without “high quality 5G Standalone (5GSA) networks acting as the ‘nervous system’“. But it warns that we “lag behind other leading nations” in this area and must reform the planning system.
Regular readers will know that both mobile and broadband operators frequently push for improvements in the planning system (example here), which would make it quicker and easier for them to upgrade existing networks or deploy new masts, small cells and other infrastructure.
NOTE: Ofcom recently reported (here) that 5GSA (5G+) networks are now available to 83% of areas outside of premises in the UK, falling to 47%-65% when looking at it as a range across different mobile operators. The government, for its part, retains an ambition “for all populated areas” to have access to 5GSA based mobile broadband by 2030.
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 then followed up their 10YIS commitment by publishing a related consultation (here), which proposed a variety of possible changes to the planning system. Suffice to say that mobile operators have been quick to set out some of the areas that they think may need improvement.
Mobile UK Statement
To unlock this potential, the UK must overhaul a planning system that is currently a “digital brake” on progress, one that otherwise risks a £230bn economic windfall made possible by 5GSA deployment. (BT, 2025). Just as the Government prioritised a National Planning Policy Statement for datacentres it must in tandem focus its efforts on mobile infrastructure.
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), that sets out the Government’s planning policies, requires modernisation to prioritise the economic and social necessity of mobile infrastructure. Current decision making at a local level can often feel like digital rollout is being treated as a secondary consideration behind other factors. It is time now to shift to a bolder philosophy where the NPPF gives substantial weight to the benefits of and needs for mobile infrastructure, recognising that connectivity is essential to daily life, not just a “nicety.”
Alongside this, the Government must reform Permitted Development Rights (PDR) to reflect the refocussed NPPF and allow for rapid network evolution. Speeding up the planning process by just three months could result in the deployment of 1,600 additional 5G cells being deployed by 2030.(Digital Communities APPG, 2026). This is important to allow operators to upgrade existing sites, such as increasing mast heights for better signal delivery or adding equipment to rooftops, without long delays caused by the planning process, ensuring our networks can meet the requirements of the AI era.
The current system often says “no” by default or delays “yes” until it is too late. The ambition for all populated areas to have access to 5G standalone by 2030 is only achievable if we clear these bottlenecks today. Reform of planning regulations to improve mobile deployment removes a key area of friction, to the benefit of every community and business in Britain.
The UK cannot afford further delay. By embracing planning reform now, we will unlock the full potential of 5G, drive productivity, and secure our position as a global leader in digital connectivity.
The catch is that the Government won’t only be listening to mobile operators and must also consider the views of landowners and the electorate, which can be quite vocal in their objections to the deployment of new infrastructure and upgrades to existing sites. The concerns in this area often stem from complex disputes over rental payments for land access to complaints about the visual impact of new sites, among other things.
The irony is that those who complain about such things are often also some of the same people who will remark that local mobile signals are of a poor quality. As ever, the big difficulty is in finding the right balance, which tends to suggest that mobile operators probably won’t get everything on their wish list. But even just getting some of the things they want would help.
Whatever the outcome, the government will need to run further consultations on their future proposals and after that they’ll then need to bring forward secondary legislation, where appropriate. In other words, it may be another couple of years before any changes can be formally introduced into law. By then we’ll be facing another General Election and the usual period of uncertainty that tends to follow.
