2.2 The Government agrees that port freight demand forecasts are best used as a guide. The forecasts are deliberately made in aggregate for the United Kingdom as a whole, whereas the NPSP applies only to England and Milford Haven. They have been produced as a benchmark indication of basic national need for capacity, looking ahead to 2050, but it is normal that individual port operators and applicants should take their own views on the overall market outlook in the relevant sub-sectors, and on their potential to win greater market share. 2.3 We will actively consider, for the next round of port demand forecasts, including forecasts for passenger ferry and cruise traffic. Although there are currently no passenger traffic thresholds in s.24 Planning Act 2008, passenger traffic can be linked closely with freight, in the case of combined freight and passenger roll-on roll- off (ro-pax) services. 2.4 We will also consider producing forecasts for innovative forms of traffic, such as floating offshore wind, or carbon capture use and storage, where for the 2025 forecasts the view was taken that the baseline for forecasting was not yet sufficiently developed, and/or the market likely to be shaped by forthcoming government interventions, for such forecasts at national level to be sufficiently meaningful. As the Government’s clean energy Mission proceeds, a stronger foundation for forecasting will develop. 2.5 We will consider whether special forecasting methodologies are required for commodities of this sort, for example offshore wind supply, operations and National Policy Statement for Ports: maintenance, where volume of goods across the quay is not necessarily the best indicator of value to the wider economy. National Policy Statement for Ports: 3. Interaction with wider Planning policy Ports in the economy 3.1 We welcome the Committee’s appreciation of the vital importance of ports to the economy and agree that this importance is not always well appreciated by decision- makers at various levels in the examination and consenting processes, not limited to development consent orders (DCOs). 3.2 The Department for Transport intends to do more to promote such awareness, including with local authorities. Relationship to other spatial planning frameworks 3.3 Ports are elements in global supply chains. Within the UK, and specifically England, most of their business is intertwined with inland connectivity, offshore energy-related and other activities, or both. 3.4 There are consequently important interfaces of the policy set out in the NPSP with a range of spatial planning frameworks and consenting regimes, including the National Policy Statement for National Networks and each of the National Policy Statements for Energy Infrastructure. 3.5 Port developments which are not submitted for development consent orders will typically require works harbour revision or empowerment orders, which confer deemed planning permission. Inland works on or near port estates may also be granted planning permission under the Town & Country Planning Act, while related linear transport development may seek Transport & Works Act Orders (TWAOs) rather than, for example, being treated as associated development within the scope of the DCO. Safeguarding port development 3.6 It was suggested in evidence to the Committee, and in consultation, that the NPSP should do more to avoid interference with ports and navigation by other forms of development including Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs). National Policy Statement for Ports: Developments of concern can include offshore energy projects, and cabling for energy or telecommunications purposes. 3.7 The Government strongly agrees on the need for protection of ports and navigation, including anchorages and pilotage facilities, especially (but not limited to) those that are in frequent use for scheduled services, and not least as part of a holistic approach to Marine Spatial Prioritisation (MSPri). 3.8 However, where NSIPs are concerned, the natural place for guidance in this respect is in the NPS applicable to that form of development. 3.9 For example, paras 2.8.111 and 2.8.178ff. in the NPS for Renewable Energy Infrastructure, EN-3, contain strong policy steers on the need to design offshore wind farms, and their connecting infrastructure, in such a way as to avoid interference with navigation so far as possible. 3.10 In general, offshore developers need good port connections to build and maintain their facilities. To this extent, it is also strongly in their own interests to ensure compatibility with navigation and to avoid interference with port approaches. 3.11 However, in order to ensure that all interested parties are fully aware of the issue, we will strengthen reference to this need in the final draft NPSP. Critical National Priority Status