Government proposals to allow private sector bodies or alternative local authorities to process planning applications have been welcomed by the British Property Federation.
An amendment in the Housing and Planning Bill would give the secretary of state power, by regulation, to introduce pilot schemes in which a developer could choose an “alternative provider” to process a planning application.
The BPF said the amendment could “relieve pressure on under-resourced local authorities”, which would retain the power to determine the outcome of applications.
Melanie Leech, BPF chief executive, said: “This amendment has potential to be a real help to local authorities that struggle with a lack of planning department resources.
“Relieving local authorities from the administrative side of the planning application process will free up resources within departments, but still allows them to have the final say over development in their area.
“It is crucial that any changes are clear and transparent, to allow local communities to retain their confidence in the system.”
Providers would be able to set planning fees, with the secretary of state able to intervene if he believed they were too high.
The proposal was also welcomed by the Westminster Property Association, which has funded extra planning staff at Westminster City Council to help speed up the processing of planning applications.
Daniel Van Gelder, chairman of WPA, said: “Local Planning authorities continue to face swingeing budget cuts and regrettably it’s probably an easier political decision for them to save money by culling the number of planning officers rather than say teachers or care workers.
“But smaller planning teams lead to longer determination periods stopping us from doing our work, which ultimately creates homes and jobs.
“Brandon Lewis completely understands this and we welcome initiatives, particularly in areas with poorly performing authorities, which seek to find ways to accelerate the processing of applications.”
Andrew Whitaker, planning director at the Home Builders Federation said the pilot schemes could keep down costs for small builders and taxpayers as well as speeding up the delivery of new homes.
However, full details of how the scheme would work have yet to be announced.
Simon Ricketts, partner at King & Wood Mallesons, said: “What is proposed is a pilot scheme, but any pilot would need to resolve some basic questions.
“Where is the dividing line between ‘processing’ and ‘determination’?
“Is negotiation with an applicant or third parties or preparation of a report to members with recommendations one or the other?”
He added: “Developers certainly need authorities to provide efficient, properly funded, planning services – which may well sometimes be outsourced – but we need to be careful to ensure that an ad hoc system of outsourcing based on the individual applicant’s wishes is not a recipe for inefficiency and/or public suspicion, leading indirectly to further delays in the process.”
Labour MP Clive Betts was also concerned about how the distinction between processing and determining applications would work in practice.
He said: “The thing that is fundamental for this is that the government is saying it’s the process and not the decision-making that is being privatised.
“But the process is part of the decision-making process.”
He added: “Planning departments are still going to be there. They are still going to have to tend over lots of issues when an application is received. Yet it seems planning fees won’t go anywhere near the planning departments, further depriving local authorities of resources.”
