Greenwich Council has rejected a bid to protect democratic oversight in planning decisions, voting against a motion that sought to challenge new government regulations. The motion, proposed by Councillor Charlie Davis, Leader of the Conservative Group, argued that the government's National Scheme of Delegation of Planning Functions, due to come into effect on October 31, 2026, would significantly reduce the ability of elected councillors and residents to scrutinise planning applications.
Under the new scheme, ward councillors will no longer be able to call applications into committee, nor will councils be able to automatically refer applications based on a certain number of objections. Instead, for many applications, the decision will rest with one nominated officer and one nominated councillor. Councillor Davis described this as a significant reduction in the ability of residents and their elected councillors to scrutinise controversial planning applications
and an unprecedented centralisation of power.
This change means that any minor residential application, minor commercial application, or household application must be determined by an officer.
This is particularly concerning for issues such as Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) and the loss of family homes. Councillor Davis highlighted that Over the last 12 months, 30 HMO conversions have gone before the local planning committee and that will no longer be possible with these changes.
He added that The legislation fails to recognise the importance of local autonomy for Councillors in making decisions on planning matters that relate to their community.
Councillors Davis and Pat Greenwell highlighted concerns that the changes would diminish the role of local planning committees, citing examples where councillors had successfully rejected officer recommendations on applications. Councillor Davis provided examples of this process working effectively, such as the rejection of an eight-person HMO conversion at 16 Montbell Road, which was unanimously rejected by the local planning committee despite officer recommendations for approval, and this decision was upheld by a planning inspector. Similarly, an application to build in the garden of the Vanbrugh was called in by elected councillors and refused, with the inspector upholding their decision. Our local planning committee will all but cease to exist. That matters,
stated Councillor Davis.
However, Councillor Tom Creswell, Cabinet Member for Planning and Development, argued against the motion, stating that the new scheme is designed to boost confidence in the planning system and speed up the delivery of much-needed homes.
He contended that the overwhelming majority of planning decisions are already delegated to officers and that democratic control lies in setting strong planning policies. Councillor Creswell believes that Democratic control of the plan of planning does not happen when a small group of councillors debate a rear extension at 10 o'clock at night, it happens when the council sets strong rules. That's why we've been so intent on putting strong planning policy in our local plan and why we've introduced the strong measures on HMOs.
Councillor Creswell also claimed that For too long, applications have sat stuck in local planning authorities across England authorities which have been hollowed out by Tory austerity partly due to the time which it takes for them to get through committees. This has led to a really severe decline in confidence in our planning system which has had a knock-on effect on viability of schemes and our ability to build in Britain.
He further claimed that Decision-making should become faster and more predictable, reducing delays caused by applications being referred to committee unnecessarily.
Councillor Jeremy Fraser, Chair of Planning, also spoke against the motion, suggesting it was more about political posturing than principle.
Ultimately, the motion was not carried, with 19 votes in favour and 31 against.