The government surprised us over the summer recess by unveiling the updated National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), showing the new Prime Minister’s urgency to get Britain building. However, the changes have left councillors concerned about how much control they will have over development in their area. With their ability to refuse applications potentially reduced, early engagement and consultation will become increasingly important for councillors and residents to influence proposals.

The new framework places greater emphasis on national planning policy and strengthens the presumption in favour of development. For major applications, it also expects developers to engage with stakeholders early to identify and address key planning issues before submission.

Additionally, the government’s proposals for a national scheme of delegation is due to come into force in October this year, which would see more applications decided by officers. One councillor told me that residents will be “very upset” when they understand the implications, leaving councillors having to explain why they are “unable to do anything”.

Cllr Chris Hossack (Reform), cabinet member at Essex County Council and a Chelgate colleague, said the changes were “a step towards centralisation of planning policy”, with less weight given to local plans where their policies conflict with national policy. However, he also acknowledged that some councils had “brought this upon themselves by making poor quality refusal decisions that are not defendable”.

This is an issue we sometimes see at planning committees. Councillors refuse applications against officer advice, only for those decisions to be overturned at appeal. They can then tell residents they opposed the development, but their hands were tied by central government. The result is often the same development, but with just delays and costs to the taxpayer.

The new NPPF could help change that mindset. If councillors know an application is likely to be approved, there is little point sticking their heads in the sand. They might as well engage early, raise residents’ concerns and work with the developer to get the best possible outcome for their community.

This does not mean, however, developers can do the bare minimum. If consultation becomes the main opportunity to influence proposals, it needs to be more than a tick-box exercise. Holding an exhibition, collecting comments and submitting a Statement of Community Involvement does not necessarily mean residents or councillors have genuinely been listened to.

Cllr Hossack said developers need to listen through “meaningful prior engagement”, identify local needs and ensure housing growth can be accommodated by local services and infrastructure. Developers should therefore show how feedback has influenced their proposals, whether through changes to access, building heights, landscaping or local infrastructure. Where concerns cannot be addressed, they should explain why.

Hossack added “My own view is that the changes will hopefully encourage developers and councillors to work better together, rather than councillors refusing to engage and developers treating consultation as a tick-box exercise. Residents will always find ways to frustrate applications if they feel development is being forced upon them. If you can show that feedback has influenced proposals and secured community benefits it should help to build local trust and make for a smoother planning committee meeting”.