The Scotland gigabit review, published by the Scottish Government on 9th October 2026, identifies 249,007 premises classed as Gigabit White. That means no qualifying gigabit-capable network was evidenced there, and no sufficiently credible deployment was expected within the relevant three-year period.
The Scotland gigabit review draws on suppliers’ infrastructure and investment plans collected between 23rd May and 23rd June 2025. If you’re assessing land or a development in Scotland, it can help you ask better questions about broadband availability. It does not tell you which homes lack internet access today.
For planning purposes, I would treat the Scotland gigabit review as evidence to help target subsidised network investment, not a grant of planning permission, a new infrastructure allocation or a change to Scotland’s statutory planning policy. Proposed works must still be assessed under the applicable consent regime and National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4).
What the Scotland gigabit review actually measures
The government describes the exercise as an Open Market Review (OMR). Operators were asked to disclose existing gigabit-capable infrastructure and their prospective three-year build programmes. The public authority then evaluated the submissions against subsidy-control classifications, principally to understand where public intervention might be justified.
The review sits within a rolling programme, rather than being a once-and-for-all map of household connections. It helps Scotland determine potential intervention areas for procurement, while reducing the risk that public subsidy would displace commercial network investment already planned by providers.
A premises classification describes a fibre or equivalent gigabit-capable infrastructure position at a defined evidence date. It does not necessarily describe the speed of any broadband service a resident happens to buy, the quality of mobile coverage or the position after newer commercial work is completed. A property may have non-gigabit broadband and nevertheless be classed White.
White, Grey, Black and Under Review explained
The Scotland gigabit review outcome table classifies 249,007 premises as White, meaning no qualifying gigabit network was identified as available or likely to be built within three years. Another 237,539 premises are Under Review because coverage or proposed build requires additional verification, or there remain risks or gaps in the supplier evidence.
The same dataset identifies 1,186,107 Grey premises, associated with one qualifying network, existing or planned, and 1,348,862 Black premises, associated with two or more qualifying networks from different suppliers. These are distinct premises classifications, not percentages of development plots or individual applications.
A separate postcode presentation reports 29,827 White postcodes. Crucially, that designation means a postcode contains at least one White premises, not that every building within it is White. The report’s own table shows other classifications of premises within those same postcode boundaries.
This subtlety matters when assessing a site. A village may appear in an area represented as White without every property being eligible for subsidy. The government expressly distinguishes indicative postcode display from premises-level determinations based on Unique Property Reference Numbers, or UPRNs.
Does the report mean new funding is available?
The Scotland gigabit review does not automatically promise funding. The Scottish Government states that subsidy is targeted at premises categorised White, but White status alone does not constitute an award, procurement decision or promise that fibre will reach a particular address by a stated date. Intervention areas are selected through the applicable Open Market Review and Public Review evidence.
Under Review premises may enter a deferred procurement scope. The government says they need further assessment to establish whether they are Grey or White before being released for subsidised build. This prevents a speculative commercial programme from automatically qualifying for government funding, while retaining scope to intervene if promised investment does not materialise.
The Scottish Government shares OMR outcomes with UK departments for relevant Scottish call-offs under national gigabit procurement and voucher arrangements. It also states that Scottish premises’ eligibility is determined using the Scottish Government’s OMR, rather than simply importing the UK Government’s wider mapping exercise.
Reaching 100% (R100) and Project Gigabit should not be confused with this classification exercise. Announced connections under delivery programmes and historic OMR classifications use different dates and definitions. Subtracting one headline number from another would create a misleading claim about current Scottish coverage.
NPF4 Policy 24 and the planning implications
Scotland’s NPF4 Policy 24 on digital infrastructure supports proposals that incorporate future-proofed infrastructure, deliver new digital services, improve coverage in areas with limited capacity, or assist local and national rollout programmes. This is part of Scotland’s development plan framework and is not the same as England’s Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (GPDO).
Policy 24 also supports development that delivers community and local economic benefits through better connectivity. A well-evidenced service gap can therefore help explain the need for a network intervention, particularly for rural enterprises, housing sites, visitor accommodation and remote communities with unreliable connections.
However, Policy 24 is not unrestricted support for any broadband installation. Subparagraph (e) requires visual and amenity impacts to be minimised through careful siting, height, design, materials and landscaping, taking account of cumulative impacts and relevant technical constraints.
Where a new ground-based mast is proposed, the policy expects alternatives such as existing structures, replacement masts and site sharing to have been explored. It also addresses physical obstruction to aerodrome operations and existing technical or transmission facilities. This is a substantive site-specific exercise, irrespective of an area’s broadband classification.
The Scotland gigabit review must also be read alongside Scotland’s separate digital telecommunications planning guidance, which explains the land-use framework and relevant permissions. The precise permission, notification or permitted-development route depends on the proposed works and location. There is no automatic consent simply because a property is White or a network is described as strategically important.
What should developers and planning authorities do?
For a strategic housing or employment site, I would check broadband capacity at the same stage as road access, drainage, electricity and other enabling infrastructure. An area-wide or postcode-coloured map is a useful prompt for questions, but it is not a substitute for a provider’s site-specific serviceability statement and proposed connection programme.
Where the applicant relies on the public benefit of new fibre or communications equipment, identify the properties and businesses likely to be served, the existing service deficit, likely build costs, route constraints, land rights and the actual deliverability of the proposed solution. Separating funded works from aspirational network extensions will make the planning and investment cases more credible.
Applications for cabinets, poles, ducts, masts or associated structures may encounter conservation, landscape, road corridor, land ownership or habitat considerations. The scale and legal position of each component should be assessed separately rather than treating an entire network programme as if it carried a single consent.
For local development plans and rural development strategies, the report is potentially useful as context for digital inclusion and economic resilience. The geographic emphasis is also relevant: the government’s postcode map indicates large areas of White classifications in the Highlands, islands and Argyll and Bute, rather than suggesting that the urban central belt has no remaining access issues.
Promoters should check the latest available position at Unique Property Reference Number (UPRN) level with the operator and relevant public bodies before describing any locality as unserved. The review’s published summary is not proof of a connection failure or funding eligibility for an individual planning application.
A later 2026 review is already under way
Timing is the largest caveat. The newly published outcome reflects evidence supplied in May and June 2025, while a further September 2026 Open Market Review has already been launched. Its newer operator data may supersede earlier premises classifications as planned networks are built, changed or withdrawn.
The October publication is therefore best viewed as the outcome of one defined subsidy-control assessment. It does not prove that exactly 249,007 Scottish premises remain without gigabit infrastructure today. Equally, publishing a newer review request does not itself demonstrate that every previously White property has secured a connection.
For Planning Geek readers working in Scotland, the practical approach is to combine the 9th October report with more recent provider evidence, NPF4 Policy 24, local development plan requirements and the actual status of any proposed works. See our Planning in Scotland hub for the devolved planning context.
0 Comments