Across the country, the battle between managed decline and the massed ranks of Britain’s Yimbys wages on. For the first time, however, it looks like the Yimbys are getting somewhere. Prime Minister Keir Starmer last month accepted in full a new report to speed up the construction of nuclear power stations, even as his government retreats from its early promise to build hundreds of thousands of houses.

But in the short term, perhaps the most vicious battle is going to be fought on a new, unknown front: data centres. There are already 477 of them in the country and there could be 100 more by 2030. Last week, energy company Drax announced it would be turning its Yorkshire site into a data centre.

Data centres — essentially vast concentrations of computing power, along with high-speed networks and storage — are going to be absolutely essential as AI becomes a more important part of our modern economy. The UK has already, by some measures, the largest market for them in Europe.

This advantage has already helped to attract billions in investment from American firms. It’s an unusual reversal of the normal pattern, in which Britain invests heavily in research and development only for companies to go to the US, with its growth-oriented regulatory environment, to bring new technology to maturity.

Spying a rare case of a real national advantage (TechUK estimates they contribute £4.7 billion in Gross Value Added to the national economy annually), the Prime Minister has classed data centres as “essential national infrastructure” in order to speed up approvals. This is obviously very bad news for anybody trying to stop them getting built. And Britain being Britain, people are trying very hard.

Data centres have also recently become a battleground in the US. Some residents near American data centres have complained that they have used up all the local water, emit a permanent loud hum and lead to higher electricity bills. However, many rural campaigners in Britain are not making these arguments. As one of the campaigners who spoke to the Telegraph says, her objection is simply that she will be able to see them. No more, no less. No one, of course, wants something extremely unsightly ruining the view, but that objection must be met with a proper solution.

This battle is worth fighting. If the UK can’t build data centres then not only will it voluntarily cede a position of advantage in what seems to be shaping up to be the next industrial revolution, but it will also mean giving up on building more or less anything at all.

There are steps the Government could take to, if not assuage its critics, at least mitigate the long-term impact of development on the character of the countryside. After all, rural Britain is anything but a natural landscape. Ever since the great forests were first hacked back for farmland, our environment has reflected the priorities of a productive, industrious people. Research by Create Streets, a built-environment charity, has found that a little investment in making buildings attractive helps to mitigate local objections to new construction. A mandatory Government design code would be an option here.

The politics is also clear-cut: Labour desperately needs growth if it is to somehow find the money for further spending without making difficult decisions. The easiest place for it to pursue growth is the countryside, where it commands less support. Conservatives will likely oppose it, but they have barely 120 seats in Parliament; the opposition that matters sits behind the Prime Minister.

Data centres — like pylons, wind farms, motorways, airports and viaducts — are a necessary requirement of modern life. Their impact on local communities should be taken seriously, but change always has consequences. If done properly and with democratic accountability, there’s no reason Britain can’t be a leader in AI while bequeathing to the next generation the kind of noble industrial infrastructure left to us by the Victorians.

---

Henry Hill is Deputy Editor of ConservativeHome.

HCH_Hill

---