LGA expresses “serious reservations” about Government approaches to national scheme of delegation for decision-making in planning system

The Local Government Association has said that in principle, a national scheme of delegation could be supported to drive clarity and consistency across planning committees and to improve speed and efficiencies in decision-making for local authorities.

But in a response to the Government’s Planning Reform Working Paper: Modernising Planning Committees, the LGA said: “Our concerns lie in the detail however, and we do have serious reservations about the approaches to a national scheme of delegation set out in the working paper and we do not have a clear consensus on how a national scheme could be achieved. Working with local authorities of different types and geographies will be key.”

The Association pointed out that only 30 local planning authorities delegated 89% or less of application decisions to officers in the second quarter of 2024.

It said: “Planning committees make decisions on only a small percentage of applications each year – and those applications typically involve either larger or more controversial schemes that require greater scrutiny by those who represent their place and communities. This democratic role of councillors in decision-making is the backbone of the English planning system and our reservations about a national scheme of delegation centre on this role potentially being eroded.

“Many councillors stand for election on the basis of the role they could play in positively supporting the growth or protection of the environment and community in which they stand. Potentially removing the ability for councillors to discuss, debate or vote on key developments in their localities could erode public trust in the planning system and local government itself if there is not an official role for the local community and their representatives in decision-making for the schemes that matter most to them.”

The LGA also argued that the schemes that matter most locally can vary place by place, and therefore it was important that any national scheme of delegation was sufficiently flexible to accommodate for local variation. 

Turning to the three options put forward in the working paper for a national scheme, the LGA said: “Our reservations regarding Option 1 (‘Delegation where an application complies with development plan’) and Option 2 (‘Delegation as default with exceptions for departures from the development plan’) in the working paper relate to the fact that very rarely are applications 100% compliant with a development plan owing to the competing nature of certain policy objectives.

“Should there be varying degrees of policy compliance, how would it be determined if applications are taken to Committee and who would make such decisions? There are also concerns relating to compliance with neighbourhood plans, and whether departures of an application from those plans would be sufficient to bring an application to Committee, even if it complied with the local plan.”

In relation to Option 3 (‘Delegating as default with a prescriptive list of exceptions’), the Association warned that this would be challenging to apply at a national scale and was too prescriptive. 

“Crucially, what works for one local authority’s planning committee does not reflect what is appropriate or workable for another’s, so whilst in principle we could support a national scheme of delegation, it must come with significant room for flexibility on how it is applied sensibly in place by individual authorities,” the LGA said.

The working paper also called for views on the creation of smaller targeted planning committees specifically for strategic development, as well as the introduction of a mandatory requirement for training for planning committee members.

The LGA said it did not consider it necessary to legislate for the formal introduction of such committees.

“A sensible way forward would be to develop best practice guidance with relevant authorities for those seeking to set up such a committee and make clear that strategic development should have a clearly defined place within a Council’s planning committee system,” it argued.

On training, the Association said local government wanted to work with the Government to develop a suitable and high-quality mandatory programme for all committee members. It supports the Planning Advisory Service (PAS) to be the preferred provider of this programme.

All three of the Government’s reforms – a national scheme of delegation, smaller committees for strategic development, and mandatory training – would require changes to primary legislation through the Planning and Infrastructure Bill.