Planning and Infrastructure bill – the evolution of the planning committee

Last year we wrote here about early proposals for a Planning and Infrastructure bill in 2025. The Government has since published a working paper providing more detail as to how it intends to modernize planning committees. 

The paper proposes three reforms that would require legislative change via the proposed Planning and Infrastructure bill:

1. A national scheme of delegation;
2. Smaller, targeted committees for strategic development; and
3. Mandatory training for planning committee members.

National scheme of delegation

The paper acknowledges that, whilst decision-making power should largely remain in local hands, significant delay is often incurred when planning committees reconsider the principle of development on a site that has already been allocated in the local development plan, and / or decisions are made against an officer recommendation only to later be overturned on appeal. The Government is therefore proposing to introduce a national scheme of delegation to standardise and streamline which decisions are decided by committee and which are delegated to officers, recognising where sites have already had democratic approval via the local plan process. Three options are proposed:

Option 1 – Delegation where an application complies with the development plan

These applications would be delegated to officers to ensure that committees do not spend time considering those applications that comply with the development plan. All other applications would be decided as they are now i.e. it would be up to the individual council to determine whether they are determined by a committee or officers.  There would need to be clarity on what compliance with the development plan means (particularly where the plan is out of date) as often policies pull in different directions and whether an application accords overall requires exercise of judgement.

Option 2 – Delegation as default with exceptions for departures from the development plan

This option would mean that all applications are delegated to officers unless specific circumstances apply – for example where there is a departure from the development plan but officers still recommend approval, or the application is submitted by the authority itself. The Government acknowledges that the number of applications comprising departures could be significant or involve controversial applications however, so it is considering whether a level of discretion is required for committee to take over applications.

Option 3 – Delegation as default with a prescriptive list of exceptions

This option would again require all applications to be delegated to officers, but then a national scheme of delegation would set out a prescribed list of exception applications that would be decided by committee (for example for major development on an unallocated site or if there were a certain number of objections). 

A hybrid approach

The paper also suggests that elements of Options 1 to 3 could be combined and seeks views on all mooted options.

Targeted committees

Following the success of small, targeted committees like the approach of the Ebbsfleet Development Corporation, the Government is considering requiring authorities to establish dedicated committees to focus on strategic development (where there is such development planned in a council’s area). The aim would be to build expertise of complex matters, resulting in a more direct decision-making process, whilst ensuring that the decision-making remained local. The Government is exploring whether three to five members is an appropriate number and the threshold for “strategic” development.

Mandatory training

The paper expresses concern at the number of committee determinations overturned at appeal due to weak justification for refusal by the committee. The introduction of mandatory, certified training should help to ensure that members are better informed, and that decisions are robust. 

Improving the efficiency of the planning system is fundamental if the Government wants to get anywhere near its housing targets.  Therefore, it is certainly welcome that the Government recognizes the wasted time spent debating the principle of decisions that have already been through rigorous local examination, such as where an application is on an allocated site, alongside acknowledging that authorities need assistance – be that through increased capacity (noting the Government’s pledge for 300 more planning officers) or increased training.

The paper is a working paper only and, if any of the paper’s proposals are taken forward, detailed consultation will follow potentially at the stage of secondary legislation. The Government is seeking views on the above options and is collecting data including on refusals against officer recommendation, appeal overturns and costs awards.