Proposed Changes to Planning Process

Keith Prince AM moved, and Alex Wilson AM seconded the following motion: 

“This Assembly notes:

• The Government has proposed changes to the national scheme of delegation for local planning authorities.
• These changes would place significant limits on the power of locally elected ward Councillors to ‘call-in’ planning applications.
• Under the Government’s proposals, planning applications such as residential extensions, housing developments under ten units and changes to shopfronts would be entirely decided by unelected officers rather than the elected members of Councils across the country.
• Mayors will also have new powers under the proposals, allowing them to bypass local planning authorities on any residential developments over 150 homes and any development over 30 metres tall, roughly 10 storeys.
• The London Forum of Amenity and Civic Societies has warned that the proposals are an “attack on local democracy,” leaving residents unable to seek meaningful support from councillors on individual applications.

The Assembly believes:

• That the Government’s proposals are a draconian overreach which would limit the powers of local Councillors and in-turn weaken their ability to represent their communities effectively.
• That removing oversight of planning applications by elected members reduces public trust, transparency and shuts residents out of debates on the future of their local communities.
• That devolution means giving power to communities, not taking it away.

The Assembly resolves to:

1. Request that the Mayor of London works with London’s Councils to lobby the Government to scrap the plans and support the rights of elected Councillors across London.
2. Direct the Chair of the Assembly to write to the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government setting out the Assembly’s opposition to the plans and demand the protection of Councillors ‘call-in’ powers and committee oversight in local planning.”

Following debate and upon being put to a vote, the motion was agreed with 11 votes being cast in favour, and 7 votes cast against.