JESSIES BLOG: Why Worcester Liberal Democrats abstained on the Government’s new planning rules

At Worcester City Council, we were asked to approve changes to the way planning applications will be decided in Worcester.

The changes sound technical — they are called the National Scheme of Delegation of Planning Functions — but they could make a very real difference to residents who become involved in a planning application in their neighbourhood.

As Liberal Democrats, we decided to abstain.

That was not because we couldn't make up our minds. It was because there were two very different questions before us.

Does Worcester City Council have to implement the Government's new system? Yes.

Do we agree with the Government taking some of these decisions away from local democratic control? No.

So what is actually changing?

From 31 October 2026, the Government is introducing national rules governing which planning applications are decided by professional planning officers and which can be decided by elected councillors on Planning Committee.

Until now, councils have had considerably more freedom to set their own local arrangements. Worcester has its own scheme setting out which decisions officers can make and which can come before councillors.

The Government is replacing much of that local discretion with a national system. ([GOV.UK][1])

Under the new rules, planning applications are divided broadly into two categories.

The first, Schedule 1, includes things such as householder applications, minor commercial development and smaller residential developments of up to nine homes on sites below 0.5 hectares.

These applications must normally be decided by planning officers. They cannot simply be brought before Planning Committee because a councillor or local residents believe councillors should determine them. ([GOV.UK][1])

The second category, Schedule 2, includes many of the larger and more significant applications.

But even here, the starting assumption is that the application will be decided by officers. For it to go before Planning Committee, it has to satisfy a specified gateway test and the nominated senior planning officer and nominated Planning Committee councillor have to agree that it should be referred to committee. ([GOV.UK][1])

Worcester's own officers have told Planning Committee that the new system will effectively “raise the bar” for applications reaching committee and that, looking back at previous agendas, some applications considered by councillors would not have reached committee under the new rules. ([Worcester Committee][2])

What does that mean if you object to an application?

This is probably the most important change for residents.

You still have the right to comment on or object to a planning application. Planning officers must still consider relevant representations regardless of whether the final decision is taken by officers or councillors. ([GOV.UK][3])

What changes is your ability to get that application in front of the Planning Committee.

Under the new national system, councils will no longer be able to operate traditional arrangements allowing a ward councillor simply to “call in” an application for determination by Planning Committee. Nor can an application automatically be sent to committee because it receives a certain number of objections. ([GOV.UK][1])

That is a significant change.

Imagine an application affecting your street attracts considerable local concern. Residents contact their councillors and ask them to make sure the application is debated publicly by elected members.

Depending upon what type of application it is, under the new system that may simply no longer be an option.

For Schedule 1 applications, the decision normally belongs to officers. For Schedule 2 applications, there is a route to committee, but only through the new gateway process. ([GOV.UK][1])

Why is the Government doing this?

There is another side to this argument, and it is important to acknowledge it.

The Government says the current system varies too much between councils and that planning committees sometimes spend their time considering relatively minor or technical applications.

Its intention is to create greater consistency across England, allow professional planning officers to deal with more routine applications and enable Planning Committees to concentrate their time on the most important, complex or contentious developments. ([GOV.UK][1])

There is a legitimate debate to be had about how we make our planning system faster and more efficient.

But Liberal Democrats don't believe the answer should be Whitehall deciding how much local democratic involvement every council is allowed to have.

Our concern is local democracy

Planning officers do an incredibly important job. This isn't an argument against professional planning officers making decisions — they already make a very large proportion of them.

Our objection is to central government deciding that local councils cannot choose for themselves where the appropriate balance lies between officer delegation and democratic scrutiny.

When these proposals went through Parliament, Liberal Democrats challenged them.

In the House of Lords, Liberal Democrat Baroness Pinnock argued for safeguards around the national scheme and warned against the rush to take “the local out of local democracy.” ([Hansard][4])

That phrase sums up our concern very well.

Local councillors know their communities. We speak to the people living next to proposed developments. We know the history of particular sites and neighbourhoods.

And, crucially, residents can hold us accountable for the decisions we make.

We believe decisions should be taken as close as reasonably possible to the people affected by them.

So why didn't we vote against?

Because voting against the Worcester report would not have stopped these changes.

This is national legislation. Worcester City Council cannot amend it, overturn it or decide not to comply with it.

The Government's guidance is very clear: councils must operate consistently with the regulations from **31 October 2026**. If a Planning Committee makes a decision that legally should have been delegated to officers, that decision could be challenged through judicial review and potentially quashed. ([GOV.UK][1])

The decision before Worcester councillors was therefore about changing our local arrangements and Constitution so that our Council can operate legally when the national rules take effect.

Simply voting against that would not make the Government's legislation disappear.

We didn't believe it would be responsible to prevent our officers from putting in place arrangements that Worcester is legally required to operate.

But we couldn't vote for it either

Equally, we could not vote in favour and give the impression that Worcester Liberal Democrats endorsed the Government's decision.

So we abstained.

Our abstention was a deliberate distinction between accepting the legal reality Worcester City Council now faces and supporting the political decision that created it.

There is also an important safeguard in Worcester's decision.

The Council has agreed that a report will come back in 12 months reviewing the effectiveness and impact of the new delegated arrangements. ([Worcester Committee][5])

We want that review to look carefully at what has actually happened: how many applications that might previously have received councillor scrutiny have instead been determined by officers, how the new gateway process is working, and what the changes have meant for residents trying to have their voices heard.

We support building the homes Worcester needs. We support an efficient planning system. And we absolutely support the professional officers who make planning decisions every day.

But efficiency and local democracy should not be treated as opposing ideas.

Worcester has to implement these changes.

That doesn't mean we have to agree with them.

[1]: www.gov.uk/government/publications/planning-committees-and-the-national-scheme-of-delegation-of-planning-functions-guidance-for-local-planning-authorities-in-england/planning-committees-and-the-national-scheme-of-delegation-of-planning-functions-guidance-for-local-planning-authorities-in-england "Planning Committees and the National Scheme of Delegation of Planning Functions: Guidance for local planning authorities in England - GOV.UK"
[2]: committee.worcester.gov.uk/mgAi.aspx "Agenda item - National Scheme of Delegation - Modern Council"
[3]: www.gov.uk/government/consultations/reform-of-planning-committees-technical-consultation/reform-of-planning-committees-technical-consultation "Reform of planning committees: technical consultation - GOV.UK"
[4]: hansard.parliament.uk/pdf/lords/2025-10-22 "Vol. 849
No. 202
Wednesday
22 October 2025
PA R L"
[5]: committee.worcester.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx "Agenda for Council on Tuesday, 15th September, 2026, 7.00 pm - Modern Council"