Agenda item

The Executive Director presented the Planning Advisory Service (PAS) Review for the consideration of Cabinet. In doing so, the following was highlighted:

·       The review covered the Bromsgrove District Council’s Local Plan production and the Development Management decision making framework.

·       PAS noted that the Planning service was operating in a complex environment in a District that was made up of eighty-nine per cent Green Belt and had only 2.4 years of housing land supply left which led to speculative development.

·       The report noted that the Council was currently under No Overall Control (NOC). This had led to a greater need for cross party collaboration.

·       Development Management processes were broadly very sound. However, early engagement between Members and Officers was not always consistent with regard to applications.

·       The Review had noted that Planning was increasingly being viewed through a party-political lens rather than a shared Corporate Priority.

·       Trust needed to be rebuilt between Members and Officers.

·       There were significant obstacles in meeting the Local Development Plan timetable, not least in the absence of the national plan making regulations and Local Government Reorganisation (LGR).

·       There was a need to embed governance arrangements in order to foster cross-party consensus around the Local Plan. This would mean development of a compelling spatial vision, and the completion of the evidence base and working with key partners such as Worcestershire County Council.

·       PAS noted that the Council must create an environment where behaviours reflected shared goals rather than individual political agendas.

·       The report made it clear that Planning was a key Corporate Risk.

·       The political leadership and senior managers needed to support and enable Officers and Members to make difficult but necessary decisions.

·       It was noted that Bromsgrove District Council’s Planning service was at a critical juncture, and that leadership and senior management must have a clear opportunity to address the current risks but also set a new tone for how Councillors, Officers and senior leadership worked together, collectively taking responsibility for how Planning shaped the future of the District.

·       As a result of the Review, fifteen recommendations were made - eight related to Development Management and the decision-making process and seven to the Local Plan development. The recommendations aimed to build consensus, develop an agreed vision, training, resources and improved partner relations. Officers had drawn up an action plan as to how the recommendations could best be delivered, these were included in Appendix 2 to the report.

·       The PAS Review had been presented to Group Leaders at a meeting held on 28^th January 2026. It was also pre-scrutinised by the Overview and Scrutiny Board on 10^th February 2026. The points raised by the Board were included in Appendix 3 to the report; and the recommendation in respect of joint Member and Officer Planning training was reflected in the action plan.

·       A key recommendation from the Review in order to build political consensus, was that a cross-party Working Group be established with a defined, politically balance membership proportionate to Group size. Given it was important to move things forward – including responding to consultation on the National Planning Framework by Group Leaders - this Local Plan Cross Party Working Group (LPCPWG) should be established with immediate effect. It was highlighted that this had taken place and that the LPCPWG had already met twice.

·       A meeting with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Planning Committee had also taken place. This had resulted in some suggestions regarding the operation of the Planning Committee being agreed and implemented as soon as practicable. A number of other matters that needed more in-depth consideration had been referred to the Constitution Review Working Group.

·       A draft Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) had been produced and sent to Worcestershire County Council (WCC), for comment and discussion.

·       Resourcing requirements had been identified for both the Local Plan and Development Management areas. These had recognised that additional staff were required in both areas and also due to the increase in Planning applications. These additional roles would be funded through Planning income or if necessary, from the Financial Resilience Reserve Fund.

·       It should be noted that the Development Management element of the Review and report was paid for by the Planning Advisory Service and was therefore carried out at no cost to the Council. The Local Plan element cost a total of £17,744.

·       Members were asked to note that failure to adopt a new Local Plan prior to LGR in April 2028 created uncertainty over Plan ownership, as the new Authority would have the final decision on adoption and implementation. The Council had written to Wyre Forest District Council regarding the potential for a North Worcestershire Local Plan and this was rejected in favour of a single District Plan for their area.

·       A significant Risk Implications section had been included in this report.

Following the presentation of the report there was a detailed discussion which included:

·       Governance of the LPCPWG – Cabinet was informed that a suggestion had been made by some Members that the membership of the Working Group be made up of two Members from each political group within the Council rather than it being politically balanced. However, it was noted that the PAS Review had stated that the new LPCPWG had a ‘defined membership proportionate to group sizes’ within the Council. In terms of the Chairman of the LPCPWG, there had been discussions regarding the potential of an Officer being appointed to this role. The PAS Review had however, suggested the possibility of the Working Group being chaired by the Leader of the Council (which was the current arrangement) or relevant Assistant Director. However, it was noted that the preferred arrangement was that this be a Member-led Working Group. Members discussed the possibility of the appointment of an ‘independent’ Chairman particularly as this matter was highly emotive for both Members and residents. Members queried whether it would be possible for a member of the PAS Review peer team or the Legal Counsel who currently provided advice to the Working Group to chair the meetings. It was suggested that this approach might provide a clear narrative and impartial advice in terms of the development of the Local Plan. Officers undertook to look into the chairing of the LPCPWG further and update Members regarding the options accordingly. It was important for Members to understand if the external chairing approach was taken that it could incur significant costs for the Council and that governance arrangements in terms of Chairman’s casting votes would need to be carefully considered.

·         Members were clear that this matter must move forward quickly and appropriately. Particularly due to the deadlines imposed by the Government. It was noted that if a collective decision could not be made by Members, there was the risk of Government intervention in plan-making which would see decisions on the future direction of growth for Bromsgrove being taken away from the Council.  Collective decision-making and cross-party working was key in order to provide the best outcomes for the residents of the District.

·         A significant amount of pressure was currently being placed on Officers. This had been raised as part of the PAS Review which had highlighted Officer ill-health and burnout. This was something that must be avoided and Members should aim to be ‘on the same page’ in terms of the decisions making process going forward.

·         Cabinet was keen that this be a transparent process. Meetings with individuals or small groups of Members should be avoided, as detailed in the PAS report, in order to ensure transparency of the process and encourage cross party working and collective decision making. It was important that decisions be made through the LPCPWG. If any specific areas needed to be discussed outside of these meetings they should be carried out at Group Leader level, in line with the usual approach taken in these matters. Discussions and decisions made by the LPCPWG could then be communicated to all Members at Planning Advisory Meetings open to all Members.

·         Draft Terms of Reference (ToR) of the LPCPWG – These were still to be agreed, and Officers were undertaking work to move this forward. It was hoped that the draft ToR would be considered and agreed at the next meeting of the LPCPWG. It was noted that (as detailed in the previous bullet point) that the ToR should be agreed at a meeting of the LPCPWG.

·         Timeline of decision making for the Local Development Plan – Members queried when the final decision for the Local Development Plan needed to be made. Although it was noted there was a Government deadline of December 2026, it was hoped that a collective decision be made by June 2026. This would ensure that the Council was in the best position to start the implementation of the Local Plan prior to LGR.

·         Adoption of the PAS Recommendations – it was noted that all recommendations made as a result of the PAS Review be adopted by the Council including those in respect of the Planning Committee. It was confirmed that this would be the case. Any recommendations that needed to be considered by the Constitution Review Working Group would be referred accordingly. In terms of Member and Officer training as detailed within the report, Officers were currently liaising with training providers for Green and Grey Belt training, and a Local Plan and Planning Committee workshops was also in the process of being arranged. It was hoped that most of these sessions would be completed prior to the start of the new municipal year. Officers will be meeting with the Planning Advisory Service to discuss the wider training programme that was recommended.

·         The Cabinet Member for Planning, Strategic Housing and Worcestershire Regulatory Services (WRS) had been approached by Ward Members who wished to discuss matters regarding the relevant Wards in order to better understand the process.  These meetings could be facilitated with representatives from the Legal and Planning teams in attendance as appropriate.

·         A typographical error was highlighted in paragraph 5.1 contained within the report.

Following the detailed discussion, Members thanked the PAS peer team for carrying out a robust and detailed review. Thanks were also extended to all Officers and Members involved in the review and preparation of the report.

RESOLVED that

1)    The findings of the Planning Advisory Service (“PAS”) Report dated January 2026 be noted.

2)    The comments of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee regarding consideration of the PAS Report noted.

3)    The recommendations made by the PAS be accepted and implemented.

4)    The progress made to date as set out in the report be noted and the Planning Advisory Service Recommendations Action Plan be adopted.