The transition to the new local plan system is the most significant change to plan-making in a generation. Following our Plan, Prepare, Progress webinar in July and the subsequent publication of the new National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), Simon Berkeley, Professional Lead for Plans Examination, has taken a closer look at the questions raised by local planning authorities, and what they tell us about the road ahead.
Back in July, we had over 700 attendees at our Plan, Prepare, Progress webinar, with a lot of questions raised during the session. We've now had a chance to go back through those questions in detail, and I wanted to use this blog to share some of the strongest themes that emerged, along with our responses. We're conscious that many of you are grappling with similar issues at the same time, so if you were not able to join us live, or if your question did not get answered on the day, we hope this gives you the wider picture.
Timetables, and what happens if things slip
Understandably, the 30-month timescale was one of the biggest topics of the session. We know that many of the pressures on that timetable, particularly delays in externally produced evidence, sit largely outside a Local Planning Authority’s (LPA) direct control. Several LPAs shared real examples of the high demand and longer lead times currently for third party consultancy and receipt of material from other statutory consultees. We don't underestimate the challenges this brings, and we have heard your concerns.
I'd like to emphasise that the 30-month timeframe is a clear government expectation, rather than a statutory deadline with automatic penalties attached. The mechanism for managing any third party induced slippage is the local plan timetable itself: keeping it realistic, keeping it updated, and telling us as early as possible when things change. Early notice means we at the Planning Inspectorate can plan our resourcing properly, allocating assessor and Inspector time appropriately whereas late notification risks compounding delays further down the line.
My colleagues from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) noted in the webinar that ministerial intervention remains a power in reserve for the most severe cases, but it's very much a last resort rather than a default response, and the department’s current focus is firmly on supporting authorities rather than intervention.
"Gateway 2 isn't a 'pass or fail' stage. It's designed to give you an Inspector's observations and advice to help you progress towards consultation"
Gateway 2: an opportunity, not a hurdle
Several of you asked what happens if you ‘fail’ Gateway 2, and whether the clock stops while you get things ready to try again. I’m glad this was raised so that we can clear up any misunderstanding: Gateway 2 isn't a 'pass or fail' stage. It's designed to give you an Inspector's observations and advice to help you progress towards consultation, Gateway 3, and submission. We'd encourage LPAs to think of it as a genuine opportunity for support and feedback, not a ‘hurdle’ to be cleared.
"We recognise the governance sensitivities...around publishing draft material that could shift before it is finalised to be presented for consultation."
The more you're able to share at Gateway 2, including draft policies, policy options, or emerging thinking on spatial strategy, even where it's not yet been through member sign-off, the more useful the feedback we can offer. We recognise the governance sensitivities this raises, particularly around publishing draft material that could shift before it is finalised to be presented for consultation. There are practical ways to manage this: use your own redaction policies where things may be commercially sensitive, label figures or wording as provisional or pre-decision where appropriate and be clear in your covering letters about what's still subject to sign-off. Draft plans and policies maps remain optional at Gateway 2, so LPAs are also free to provide narrative detail on emerging thinking rather than a fully mapped, working document if that feels more appropriate.
"If your authority is facing significant challenges as a result of these LGR changes, my colleagues at MHCLG ask that you contact. them at the earliest opportunity."
Local government reorganisation
Many questions reflected the genuine complexity that local government reorganisation is creating for plan-making, particularly around shifting geographies, timing, and how joint working arrangements should adapt. This came through as one of the most frequently raised issues of the day - something that was no surprise to colleagues in MHCLG who are aware of and responding to the demands on local government at this time.
Of course, since this webinar was broadcast in early July there have been significant announcements regarding Local Government Reorganisation (LGR). Further guidance for LPAs affected by Local Government Reorganisation is available here pointing towards MHCLG's commitment to bringing forward transitional arrangements to help support plan-making during the transition. In the meantime, the message to LPAs is that plan-making should continue in line with the timing set out in the 2026 Regulations. If your authority is facing significant challenges as a result of these LGR changes, my colleagues at MHCLG ask that you contact them at the earliest opportunity.
Evidence production came up frequently in our webinar, from playing pitch assessments to strategic flood risk work, and understandably so. Many of you are already procuring and producing evidence to meet current timescales and asked whether this work might need to be redone later to fit new standards. We want to reassure you that the intention behind data standards and digital approaches is to improve consistency and reduce duplication, not to require authorities to recreate evidence they've already properly prepared.
Evidence, resourcing and getting ahead of the curve
As an Inspector with decades of field work experience, I’m reassured that our joint advice remains much the same as it has always been – identify what evidence you'll need as early as possible and start planning for it now, rather than waiting until a gateway is imminent. Some things never change! We recognise that much of this depends on third parties, including consultants and statutory bodies, whose capacity sits outside our direct oversight. MHCLG, along with the Planning Inspectorate continue to work on guidance, data standards and the model plan to support a more proportionate and consistent approach to evidence over time.
Digital services and accessibility
Several questions touched on the balance between digitisation and accessibility. We don’t believe these should be viewed as competing pressures but rather ‘parallel obligations’. Not every stakeholder has the same level of digital capability, and LPAs will need to continue following their accessibility policies throughout the local planning process. The digital services being developed, including the Planning Inspectorate’s new examination portal currently in development (introduced in the webinar and in this blog) , are intended to complement what LPAs already publish on their examination websites.
"If there are topics you'd find particularly useful for us to explore, we'd be pleased to hear your suggestions."
Where to find more, and what's next
If you'd like to go back through the guidance we discussed, the best place to start is the Create or Update a Local Plan website, alongside the New Local Plan-making System Roadmap, which sets out the sequencing of guidance still to come. Both are being updated regularly, so it's worth checking back or signing up for alerts. We have also recently published our first edition of the Procedure Guide for new system plans. Again, this is likely to evolve further as the system beds in, and our digital examination service is more fully developed.
We'll continue to share updates and insights on the new system, and your feedback will help inform future content. If there are topics you'd find particularly useful for us to explore, we'd be pleased to hear your suggestions.
We know the next 18 months or so are asking a great deal of local planning authorities whether you are working at pace towards the 31 December submission deadline in the legacy system or embarking on your planning journey in the new system. We don't take that for granted, and we're genuinely trying to build a system, and a working relationship with you, that reflects what we’re hearing from you.
Leave a comment