Scotland's push to become a global centre for AI infrastructure is being built on planning foundations that predate it.
National Planning Framework 4 sets out no enforceable definition of a "green data centre."
No national energy strategy has been published since 2017, despite one being ready for Cabinet since May 2024.
Communities from Newarthill to Auchtertool report being told one story about jobs, renewables, and community benefit, while planning documents obtained under Freedom of Information show another.
This charter sets out what we are asking every candidate standing in the May 2027 council elections, and every sitting MSP and minister, to commit to before residents vote in what may even become a snap general election (Bookies say 28% chance)
It is not a call to reject data centre investment outright.
It is a call for decisions to be made on an honest, evidenced, and accountable basis which is not what is happening now.
Every demand below is accompanied by the evidence it is based on.
This is a working draft, open to refinement by campaign partners before wider circulation.
The Demands
Demand 1:
Publish an enforceable definition of a "green data centre."
NPF4 designates green data centres as a national development, but leaves planning authorities to interpret what "green" means case by case, with no binding criteria on renewable power sourcing, water consumption, or heat re-use.
We ask the Scottish Government to publish a fixed, enforceable definition before any further national development consent is granted.
Evidence:
Scottish Parliament written answer S6W-41362 confirms no fixed criteria exist; planning authorities are left to "consider criteria" on a discretionary, case-by-case basis.
Demand 2:
Call a temporary moratorium on new data centre planning consent until that definition exists.
Decisions are being made now, without the guidance that is meant to inform them.
We ask for a pause on granting further consent until the green data centre definition above is published and in force.
Evidence:
First Minister Swinney has stated he is "giving active consideration" to national planning guidance, without committing to a pause. APRS and the Environmental Rights Centre for Scotland have jointly called for exactly this moratorium. This is being considered in parliament.
But when?
Demand 3:
Publish the Energy Strategy and Just Transition Plan without further delay.
Scotland has had no published national energy strategy since 2017.
The current strategy was drafted in January 2023, promised for "Summer 2024," and confirmed ready for Cabinet in May 2024 then deferred for a UK General Election purdah that ended in July 2024.
It remains unpublished two years on.
Evidence:
JP Marks's letter to First Minister Swinney, 28 May 2024, names the Energy Strategy and Just Transition Plan among documents deferred for purdah.
Gillian Martin's written answer S6W-44231, 25 March 2026, confirms it remains unpublished, citing ongoing UK energy policy developments.
Demand 4:
Require cumulative impact assessment across all data centre applications in a region, not each in isolation.
No systematic framework requires planning authorities to assess the combined water, grid, and land impact of multiple data centre developments in the same area. Each is currently assessed alone.
Evidence:
Objectors to the Larbert hyperscale application have formally raised this gap, submitting that the applicant has failed to demonstrate how "cumulative national impacts of data centre expansion have been assessed" under NPF4.
National Planning Framework 4 sets out no enforceable definition of a "green data centre."
No national energy strategy has been published since 2017, despite one being ready for Cabinet since May 2024.
Communities from Newarthill to Auchtertool report being told one story about jobs, renewables, and community benefit, while planning documents obtained under Freedom of Information show another.
This charter sets out what we are asking every candidate standing in the May 2027 council elections, and every sitting MSP and minister, to commit to before residents vote in what may even become a snap general election (Bookies say 28% chance)
It is not a call to reject data centre investment outright.
It is a call for decisions to be made on an honest, evidenced, and accountable basis which is not what is happening now.
Every demand below is accompanied by the evidence it is based on.
This is a working draft, open to refinement by campaign partners before wider circulation.
The Demands
Demand 1:
Publish an enforceable definition of a "green data centre."
NPF4 designates green data centres as a national development, but leaves planning authorities to interpret what "green" means case by case, with no binding criteria on renewable power sourcing, water consumption, or heat re-use.
We ask the Scottish Government to publish a fixed, enforceable definition before any further national development consent is granted.
Evidence:
Scottish Parliament written answer S6W-41362 confirms no fixed criteria exist; planning authorities are left to "consider criteria" on a discretionary, case-by-case basis.
Demand 2:
Call a temporary moratorium on new data centre planning consent until that definition exists.
Decisions are being made now, without the guidance that is meant to inform them.
We ask for a pause on granting further consent until the green data centre definition above is published and in force.
Evidence:
First Minister Swinney has stated he is "giving active consideration" to national planning guidance, without committing to a pause. APRS and the Environmental Rights Centre for Scotland have jointly called for exactly this moratorium. This is being considered in parliament.
But when?
Demand 3:
Publish the Energy Strategy and Just Transition Plan without further delay.
Scotland has had no published national energy strategy since 2017.
The current strategy was drafted in January 2023, promised for "Summer 2024," and confirmed ready for Cabinet in May 2024 then deferred for a UK General Election purdah that ended in July 2024.
It remains unpublished two years on.
Evidence:
JP Marks's letter to First Minister Swinney, 28 May 2024, names the Energy Strategy and Just Transition Plan among documents deferred for purdah.
Gillian Martin's written answer S6W-44231, 25 March 2026, confirms it remains unpublished, citing ongoing UK energy policy developments.
Demand 4:
Require cumulative impact assessment across all data centre applications in a region, not each in isolation.
No systematic framework requires planning authorities to assess the combined water, grid, and land impact of multiple data centre developments in the same area. Each is currently assessed alone.
Evidence:
Objectors to the Larbert hyperscale application have formally raised this gap, submitting that the applicant has failed to demonstrate how "cumulative national impacts of data centre expansion have been assessed" under NPF4.
Demand 5:
Make community benefit funding legally binding and funded up front, not contingent on future developer revenue.
Community benefit promises are being announced before they are funded.
We ask that all Section 75 planning obligations tie community funds to construction milestones, secured at the point permission is granted, not to a developer's future revenue projections.
Evidence: DataVita's announced £543m community fund for the Lanarkshire AI growth zone does not currently exist and is contingent on future DataVita revenue (Guardian investigation, 6 July 2026).
Demand 6: End the use of Masterplan Consent Areas to pre-agree consent for data centres without full public application.
Masterplan Consent Areas, introduced under the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019, allow a planning authority to pre-agree consent terms for a whole area in advance.
Once an MCA scheme is adopted, development in line with it can proceed without a full individual planning application.
We ask that green data centres be explicitly excluded from MCA eligibility, so that every application receives full public scrutiny.
Evidence: Scottish Government's own development management guidance (gov.scot) names green data centres among the development types MCAs are being extended to support, alongside national developments and Green Freeports.
Demand 7:
End confidential pre-application engagement between developers and planning authorities on data centre proposals.
Residents in Newarthill were door-knocked with informal, unenforceable offers months before any public announcement, while formal pre-application advice given to developers is treated as confidential by default.
We ask that pre-application engagement on major energy and digital infrastructure proposals be published as a matter of course, not withheld unless a specific, published justification is given.
Evidence:
North Lanarkshire Council's own published pre-application advice guidance for major developments states the service "is confidential, and no information will appear on the public planning portal."
Demand 8:
Justify jobs and investment figures with site-specific evidence, not figures imported from other developments.
Headline jobs figures used to sell major developments to the public should be traceable to the actual site in question, not scaled estimates borrowed from unrelated projects.
Evidence:
APRS's FOI request found the government's 3,400-jobs figure for the Lanarkshire AI growth zone was extrapolated from industry estimates for a different site, Cambois in Northumberland, and then scaled up. APRS's own assessment is that the real figure could be up to a hundred times smaller.
Demand 9:
Introduce a Third Party Right of Appeal for communities on major developments.
A developer refused planning permission can appeal that decision.
A community whose objections are overruled cannot.
This structural asymmetry means the planning system is designed to favour the applicant by default.
We ask for an amendment to the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act, via Member's Bill or Government Bill, to restore basic symmetry between developers and the communities affected by their proposals.
Evidence:
Scotland currently has no Third Party Right of Appeal. This is a devolved matter requiring no Westminster involvement.
Demand 10: Require mandatory disclosure of beneficial ownership and intended end-user for all developments over 50MW.
Communities are being asked to approve major infrastructure whose true owners and operators are not disclosed at the point of application.
Planning law currently does not require this information, allowing ownership to sit behind shell companies, special purpose vehicles, and offshore investment structures.
We ask for disclosure to be made a mandatory condition of consent for developments above this threshold.
Make community benefit funding legally binding and funded up front, not contingent on future developer revenue.
Community benefit promises are being announced before they are funded.
We ask that all Section 75 planning obligations tie community funds to construction milestones, secured at the point permission is granted, not to a developer's future revenue projections.
Evidence: DataVita's announced £543m community fund for the Lanarkshire AI growth zone does not currently exist and is contingent on future DataVita revenue (Guardian investigation, 6 July 2026).
Demand 6: End the use of Masterplan Consent Areas to pre-agree consent for data centres without full public application.
Masterplan Consent Areas, introduced under the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019, allow a planning authority to pre-agree consent terms for a whole area in advance.
Once an MCA scheme is adopted, development in line with it can proceed without a full individual planning application.
We ask that green data centres be explicitly excluded from MCA eligibility, so that every application receives full public scrutiny.
Evidence: Scottish Government's own development management guidance (gov.scot) names green data centres among the development types MCAs are being extended to support, alongside national developments and Green Freeports.
Demand 7:
End confidential pre-application engagement between developers and planning authorities on data centre proposals.
Residents in Newarthill were door-knocked with informal, unenforceable offers months before any public announcement, while formal pre-application advice given to developers is treated as confidential by default.
We ask that pre-application engagement on major energy and digital infrastructure proposals be published as a matter of course, not withheld unless a specific, published justification is given.
Evidence:
North Lanarkshire Council's own published pre-application advice guidance for major developments states the service "is confidential, and no information will appear on the public planning portal."
Demand 8:
Justify jobs and investment figures with site-specific evidence, not figures imported from other developments.
Headline jobs figures used to sell major developments to the public should be traceable to the actual site in question, not scaled estimates borrowed from unrelated projects.
Evidence:
APRS's FOI request found the government's 3,400-jobs figure for the Lanarkshire AI growth zone was extrapolated from industry estimates for a different site, Cambois in Northumberland, and then scaled up. APRS's own assessment is that the real figure could be up to a hundred times smaller.
Demand 9:
Introduce a Third Party Right of Appeal for communities on major developments.
A developer refused planning permission can appeal that decision.
A community whose objections are overruled cannot.
This structural asymmetry means the planning system is designed to favour the applicant by default.
We ask for an amendment to the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act, via Member's Bill or Government Bill, to restore basic symmetry between developers and the communities affected by their proposals.
Evidence:
Scotland currently has no Third Party Right of Appeal. This is a devolved matter requiring no Westminster involvement.
Demand 10: Require mandatory disclosure of beneficial ownership and intended end-user for all developments over 50MW.
Communities are being asked to approve major infrastructure whose true owners and operators are not disclosed at the point of application.
Planning law currently does not require this information, allowing ownership to sit behind shell companies, special purpose vehicles, and offshore investment structures.
We ask for disclosure to be made a mandatory condition of consent for developments above this threshold.
Demand 11:
Require mandatory Environmental Impact Assessment (Schedule 1 status) for all computing facilities over 10MW.
Data centres above this scale currently have no guaranteed requirement for full Environmental Impact Assessment, despite their water, energy, and grid demands.
We ask for Schedule 1 status to be applied as standard, closing this gap.
Evidence:
Achievable via statutory instrument amending the 2017 EIA Regulations.
No primary legislation required; fully within existing devolved competence.
Require mandatory Environmental Impact Assessment (Schedule 1 status) for all computing facilities over 10MW.
Data centres above this scale currently have no guaranteed requirement for full Environmental Impact Assessment, despite their water, energy, and grid demands.
We ask for Schedule 1 status to be applied as standard, closing this gap.
Evidence:
Achievable via statutory instrument amending the 2017 EIA Regulations.
No primary legislation required; fully within existing devolved competence.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
