The UK government made a decision late last week not to give its National Infrastructure Commission (NIC) statutory powers - at least not for now.

The NIC, which is yet to reach its first birthday, hasn’t released a statement on the matter. But it appears that it is business as usual for the commission, which was set up in October 2015 with a remit to advise the government on its infrastructure projects and planning.

With Labour peer Lord Adonis at its helm, legislation was announced in the Queen’s Speech this year to establish the NIC as an independent body that could hold the government to account with responsibility for developing 20-to-30 year infrastructure strategies. Expected to be contained within a neighbourhood planning bill that was released last week, the proposal to make the NIC a standalone body, however, did not get a mention.

Is this a failure by government to prioritise infrastructure, another example of how “infrastructure planning in this country has been bedevilled for years by political short-termism and inconsistency,” as KPMG’s head of UK infrastructure Richard Threlfall thundered on Friday?

It depends on who you speak to. Project finance bankers and advisers seemed largely unfussed this week. “If you’re a consent lawyer, then it could be seen as a bit of a catastrophe,” said an energy financing lawyer to IJGlobal. “We’re working a lot further along the chain.” He was of the opinion that “strong, well-structured projects will always push through eventually and get funded.”

Another energy lawyer said that whether or not the NIC has statutory powers is a bit of a moot point. Lord Adonis is already "respected across the industry as having the right kind of collaborative approach to infrastructure,” he said, and the NIC “should be expected to take a dispassionate, unpoliticised view of infrastructure, whether it’s given statutory powers or not.”

One transport projects adviser said a general lack of direction from the UK’s new government is causing more trouble than a lack of a beefed-up NIC, or Brexit, as many feared this summer. “We knew under the coalition government what the policies were, even if we didn’t like them. The new leaders haven’t really said anything yet. Are we going to be pro-nuclear? Are we going to tamp down on renewables? What about the Northern Powerhouse?”

“There’s no-one to talk to in government,” an oil and gas adviser complained. “It’s like musical chairs in the government departments at the moment.”

Further adding to the sense of confusion, on 14 September rumours abounded that prime minister Theresa May would make a decision on whether to proceed with Hinkley this week. Her surprise stalling of the project on 28 July, telling sponsor EDF that the government needed time to review the contracts, came on the same day the French sponsor made its final investment decision for the £24.5 billion plant.  

However, one project adviser seemed incredulous that in the seven weeks that have passed since, the government would have been able to carry out the kind of thorough investigation of the project economics and ownership structure that May said she wanted.

Yet a day later, the rumours proved true and Hinkley was given the go-ahead. The decision to launch a review raised the project's profile in the international media, and much of the coverage focused on concerns around China's involvement in the project, something which cannot have helped French-UK-China relations. On 1 August, China’s state press agency, Xinhua, said “what China cannot understand is the ‘suspicious approach’ that comes from nowhere to Chinese investment in making the postponement.”

"Whether or not the government decides to establish the NIC through legislation, a clear set of positive signals from the government about its infrastructure priorities is what the industry really requires now," Mayer Brown partner Tom Eldridge said.

The decision to not bolster the powers of the NIC is just one of many UK state prevarications when it comes to infrastructure. NIC or no NIC, a clear set of positive signals from the government about its infrastructure priorities seems to be the desire of the industry – else this new leadership may start developing an unwelcome reputation.

A short-term lack of direction displayed by the government may have a silver lining, though, an energy lawyer said: “The heightened discussion we’re seeing at the moment about the government’s attitudes towards infrastructure has been helpful,” he said. “It’s focused people.”