Streamlining the planning system: the new National Delegation Scheme

The landscape of local planning in England is set to change significantly. On June 1, 2026, the Government laid before Parliament the draft of the “Town and Country Planning (Discharge of Local Planning Authority Functions) (England) Regulations 2026” (referred to as “the 2026 Regulations”) and released the final statutory guidance on planning committees and the national scheme of delegation (referred to as the “Guidance”). On the same day, the Government also published its response to the latest consultation regarding the technical details and drafting of regulations and guidance, which took place from March 26 to April 23, 2026.

Historically, every Local Planning Authority (“LPA”) has the power to create its own scheme of delegations under section 101 of the Local Government Act 1972. Each LPA’s scheme of delegations identifies the types of planning applications made to the authority that can be determined by officers and the types of decisions that must be referred to members for decision. Many authorities allow, in their schemes of delegation, individual councillors to require that an application that would otherwise be determined by officers be reported to committee for decision.

This is about to change. When the Regulations become operative, there will be a national scheme of delegations. LPAs will no longer have the right to use powers under s101 of the 1972 to amend them. These reforms, supported by the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025, will likely become operative on October 31, 2026, and will apply to all LPAs in England, including mineral planning authorities, but will exclude development corporations, National Park Authorities, and the Broads Authority.

The main goal is to enhance clarity and consistency in planning processes. It has been further argued that it will allow planning committees to focus on significant proposals that affect the local area, while routine, minor, or technical decisions will be managed by professional planning officers. However, will this reform genuinely simplify and streamline decision-making in local planning?

The National Delegation System

Under the new system, there will be two types of planning decisions: those that can only be made by planning officers and those that can be made by planning committees provided certain criteria apply (referred to as the “Referral Criteria”). In more detail:

• Decisions Delegated to Officers (Schedule 1 applications): If a planning application falls into this category, the decision must be made by a planning officer, and there will be no scope for an LPA to bring it to the planning committee.
  • Examples of such applications include minor residential and commercial applications, Lawful Development Certificates, applications for permissions in principle or non-material changes, submissions for a biodiversity gain plan, applications under the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015, applications to discharge conditions and reserved matters applications for proposals where the outline application refers to developments with 500 dwellings or less.
• Decisions Delegated to Committee subject to Referral Criteria – Officer Default (Schedule 2): If a planning application falls into Schedule 2, the presumption is that they will also be discharged by a planning officer, unless a nominated officer (the Guidance advises that this should be the chief planner or substitutes) and a nominated member of the committee (the Guidance advises that this should be the chair of the committee or vice chair or equivalent member if these roles don’t exist) agree that the matter should be discharged by a planning committee. To reach a conclusion, the nominated officer and nominated member must agree that one of the Referral Criteria applies and they must have regard to the Guidance. 
  • Examples of Schedule 2 applications include larger applications not already listed in Schedule 1, reserved matters applications for an outline of more than 500 dwellings, and applications for listed building consent. They also include applications to modify conditions under section 73(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act (TCPA), and variations of section 106 obligations where the original permission and the original planning obligation relate to a Schedule 2 application; retrospective applications under section 73A(1) of the TCPA, etc.

The Referral Criteria are contained in draft regulation 5 (3) and consist of:

Criterion A: Where the application raises economic or social or environmental issues of significance in the local area. The Guidance (at paragraph 23) advises that what is “significant” varies and depends on the local area. As examples, the Guidance provides the following:

• An application for outline planning permission for a large multi-phase residential development allocated in the local plan;
• An application for planning permission for change of use of a community shop in a rural area;
• An application for planning permission or listed building consent for changes to a notable listed building in a town centre.

Criterion B: Where the application raises a significant planning matter having regard to the development plan and any other material consideration. The Guidance (at paragraph 24) provides two examples where this criterion is unlikely to apply, namely:

• The application for development aligns with a detailed site allocation and relevant local or national policies, including the National Planning Policy Framework. However, it is added that significant planning issues may arise from new material considerations introduced by the application.
• If a statutory consultee initially raised a concern about a specific planning matter (e.g., highways or flood risk), but the development proposal has since been modified to address this. It is added in the end, however, that the above won’t apply if the nominated officer has compelling reasons to consider otherwise.

In the Guidance, LPAs are strongly advised to keep formal records of every case considered for referral, including the ultimate outcome and the reasons for the decision. This information should be regularly reported to the full planning committee and made publicly available on the council website.

“Own-Interest” applications

In the Regulations there are also provisions for so-called “Own-Interest” applications, which relate to applications made by the local authority, its members, or its officers. Similar to Schedule 2 applications, unless the decision is referred to a committee, it must be made by the officer with delegated powers. The test here is that the nominated officer and nominated member agree to refer an “Own-Interest” application to a committee. In reaching this conclusion, they must only have regard to the Guidance. The Referral Criteria don’t apply for the “Own Interest” applications category.

The size of planning committees

Although LPAs could decide on the number of members, under the draft Regulations it is now a requirement that the maximum number of members on a planning committee or sub-committee is now capped at 13 members. Even so, the Guidance advises local authorities to consider whether an even smaller number would better support agile, effective decision-making.

Will the national delegation system streamline the decision-making in England?

The assumption is that the more decisions made by officers under delegation powers, the more predictable and streamlined the system is.

Currently, without the national delegation system in place, about 96% of planning applications are decided by planning officers based on delegations from the Local Planning Authorities (LPAs). This statistic suggests that the reforms may represent a codification of existing practices rather than a revolutionary change.

Furthermore, there may be more referrals to a planning committee of Schedule 2 applications than originally envisaged. As explained above, under the new regime, Schedule 2 applications can be referred to planning committees if both the nominated officer and the member agree that one of the Referral Criteria applies. While this may seem like a strict requirement, the language used in Criteria A and B is quite vague. Although the Guidance provides examples, these can be interpreted in various ways. In practice, unless a matter clearly fits one of the examples outlined in the Guidance, it can be challenging for a nominated officer to refuse a referral to the planning committee. If the nominated member strongly believes that one of the criteria applies, it is difficult to see how the nominated officer could resist referring the matter.

Additionally, it is to be anticipated that, particularly in authorities where members have hitherto had the right to require consideration of unpopular items in their area by committee, there will be debates around whether Schedule 2 applications should be referred to committee, as a consequence of the Regulations.

Nevertheless, the true game-changer is found elsewhere. Under the new system, the longstanding “member call-in” mechanism—the primary tool that allowed local councillors to subject multiple applications to local scrutiny—will be completely eliminated. Furthermore, if a local authority makes a decision contrary to the new delegation system, that decision will be deemed unlawful and open to challenge through Judicial Review. This is a profound cultural shift. For some authorities, this will feel evolutionary. For others—particularly those with active member call‑in traditions—it will feel transformative.

Additionally, Schedule 2 applications, i.e. applications that may be referred to a planning committee subject to the Referral Criteria, are far more limited than the ones under Schedule 1. And even so, the bar for some larger developments has been set even higher. For example, an outline planning permission can qualify as a Schedule 2 application if it relates to a development that includes at least 500 dwellings or a building or buildings with a combined floorspace of 50,000 square metres or more. Most outline planning applications, however, refer to criteria below these thresholds. It is also highly likely that we will see an increase in applications for developments containing up to 499 dwellings or with less than 50,000 square metres of floorspace, as developers seek to ensure their projects qualify under the Schedule 1 criterion and are determined via delegated powers.  

Looking ahead

It appears that the new national delegation system will certainly affect the way planning applications have been determined so far. The message is clear: the era of broad committee discretion is ending, and a centrally -controlled delegation system will be in place to streamline the process and enhance clarity and predictability to decision‑making.

Will this new system lead to faster decision-making? This is a different question that needs to be addressed. LPAs will still lack the essential resources and expertise necessary to function effectively and will continue to face significant capacity issues that won't be easily resolved, even with the government's initiative to strengthen the planning, funding and resources available to LPAs.  In addition, there is a clear risk of judicial review if matters are wrongly referred to planning committees, and one can see just how key it will be to get the decision-making right. It wouldn’t be surprising to see senior legal officers becoming involved in many of the decisions, which may also add to delays.

Although regulations have not yet been established, local authorities should begin preparations as soon as possible, especially with the countdown clock ticking toward 31 October 2026. Some immediate actions include conducting briefings for their members, discussing nominations for officers and members, and drafting amendments to local authorities’ constitutions, which typically require approval from the full council. 

The Secretary of State is legally mandated to undertake and publish a formal review of the new scheme by 31 October 2028—but the work for local authorities begins right now.

Chrisa Tsompani and Nigel Hewitson are Partners at Davitt Jones Bould.