Create more proportionality in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) regime

EIA Regulations should be amended to:

1. Include a "principle of proportionality" which requires decision-makers to consider existing decisions (to discourage a ratcheting effect), and the extent to which outstanding matters will be addressed through other regulatory regimes. Only information necessary to determine the issue before them should be required.
2. Allow relevant departments to issue binding statutory guidance requiring decision-makers to ask only for proportionate scoping, surveys and assessments.
3. Make clear, through an interpretive provision, that "likely significant effects" does not require complete, as opposed to proportionate, data about a potential impact.
4. Affirm the Rochdale Envelope. It should be acceptable to grant consent while some surveys or design details are still outstanding. Worst-case assumptions should be case-specific and evidence-based, not drawn automatically from stricter precedents elsewhere.
5. Where there is a dispute about the level of surveys or assessments, the Secretary of State should, as part of any DCO decision, specify the most proportionate level they consider acceptable to set expectations for future decisions and projects. The Secretary of State should, when giving such guidance, have significant regard to the potential for delay and cost on development.