Stakeholder views help to shape planning improvements
Feedback from stakeholders is helping to shape future improvements for the Planning Inspectorate and for the wider planning system.
Throughout March and April this year the Planning Inspectorate sent out a survey asking our stakeholders questions on a range of topics. This included things like the perceived quality of our decisions, the type of news content they are most interested in and whether they believe we live our values.
Some of the headlines are:
- Most respondents believe we are true to our values of impartiality, fairness and openness.
- 74% indicated our work is of high quality.
- Nearly half of the respondents (46%) said they would speak positively to others about the Planning Inspectorate, and just 10% negatively. 43% were neutral.
- 33% responded that we are not focused enough on customers.
Beyond the figures we were also delighted to receive many more detailed responses raising specific concerns, suggestions, positive experiences and questions. Senior leaders in the Inspectorate have reviewed the responses, which are now helping to steer how we achieve the ambitions in our three-year Strategic Plan and improve our service for customers.
All stakeholders who work with the Planning Inspectorate were invited to take part and we were delighted to hear from many including local planning authorities, agents, developers, professional bodies and members of the public. We received 129 responses.
We want to thank everyone who took the time to take part in the annual survey and assure you that each response has been valuable for us as we collectively work to improve the planning system for all.
If you would like to sign up for regular updates from the Inspectorate, including having your say in the next survey and hearing about our upcoming webinar series, please email stakeholder.engagement@planninginspectorate.gov.uk and follow us on LinkedIn.
We have included examples of where your responses have helped us improve here:
More guidance
- Many responses, particularly from local planning authorities (LPA), showed us there is a desire for more guidance in areas to help the planning process become more efficient for all parties. Starting this autumn, we will be launching a webinar series for stakeholders covering topics such as evidence gathering for local plans; solar casework; and planning reform.
- The survey showed the most valued content on our communication channels is about casework and good practice/guidance. We have some of the sector’s leading topic experts among our staff, so we’ll be providing more useful news and insight from them, particularly in specialist planning areas. Hopefully you’ve already seen our social media series of appeal tips on social media. Please share them further when you have the chance.
Timeliness
-
Timeliness of appeal decisions remains among the most important issues for stakeholders. We recognise this. In the last year we have refocused our strategy on the core of what the Planning Inspectorate is here to do: to make consistently timely, high-quality, and cost-effective decisions. We are making good progress in our improvements:
-
Each month, we’re consistently reducing the number of appeal cases awaiting our decision. This is critical to us being consistent in our decision times in future.
-
Working closely with LPAs and appellants, we’ve cleared most of our backlog of planning appeals by hearing and inquiry, and enforcement appeals by inquiry. We’ve more to do, but decision times over the last year are now averaging 25 weeks for planning appeals by hearing and 31 weeks for planning appeals by inquiry. Decision times for enforcement inquiries are starting to reduce. Our aim for all this casework is to decide them within 26 weeks.
-
Since March 2023 we’ve been working to improve our performance on planning appeals by written representation. We’re deciding lots of older cases and reducing the number of cases we have open. Although our decision times still vary too much, they are reducing overall. Our aim is to decide all this casework within 20 weeks.
-
We’ve now started to clear the backlog of enforcement appeals by hearing, working closely with appellants and LPAs to hold high numbers of hearings over the next six months. Once we have done that, we will move onto achieving the same for enforcement appeals by written representations.
See our latest performance statistics.
Quality
We were encouraged that 74% said they thought our decisions, recommendations and advice are of high quality, regardless of outcome.
- As we speed up decisions and reduce the backlog of cases, we will not reduce quality. While we already report on the number of cases quality assured in our performance updates, we will soon be increasing transparency and reporting on the proportion of cases that could be improved. The learning gained from the quality assurance work is constantly used in training to ensure work is of the right standard.
A focus on customers
31% agreed or strongly agreed (36% neutral) we are customer focused. Additional comments suggested some difficulty in finding out the latest information on an appeal and what stage in the process it is at.
As part of our work to improve our service for customers, we are pleased to announce that the London Borough of Barnet are the first to trial our new Beta service for Householder Appeals. This pilot marks a crucial step forward in enhancing our Appeals service, bringing us closer to a more efficient and user-friendly process for all stakeholders. Improvements include:
-
Streamlined portal: A new interface for local planning authorities (LPAs), appellants, and agents to manage multiple appeals, submit documentation, and view other parties’ submissions.
-
Automated notifications: Simplified, automated communications to keep all parties informed throughout the process.
-
Enhanced ‘Make an Appeal’ journey: Improvements based on user feedback, including clearer guidance for submitting complete and valid appeals.
Improved transparency
There were several comments wanting to know more about and hear more from Inspectors, so we’re reviewing our activity to improve transparency:
-
Over the last two years, we have provided inspectors for a range of external training events, working with partners such as Homes England, Women In Planning, the Royal Town Planning Institute and Urban Design Learning. Our inspectors are always happy to talk about their roles (but not live casework) and about the Planning Inspectorate.
-
Inspectors have also visited local planning authorities, private sector bodies and university planning courses, to explain their work and to set out how we can all work together to make appeal processes more efficient and effective.
-
Our Chief Planning Inspector engages actively with relevant debates on LinkedIn and we have sent inspectors to a range of public events, such the Oxford Joint Planning Law Conference, where they are able to mix with stakeholders.
-
We are fully appreciative of the appetite of the wider sector for more informal engagement with planning inspectors and are always happy to discuss how we may work better to facilitate this, either with individual bodies or with stakeholder groups. Please contact stakeholder.engagement@planninginspectorate.gov.uk in the first instance.
Thanks again to all those who took the time to take part in our survey. The next survey will take place in February 2025.
Further data
Question: How far do you agree with the following statements? The Planning Inspectorate is…
| Strongly agree | Agree | Neutral | Disagree | Strongly disagree | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Impartial | 36% | 48% | 7% | 9% | 0% |
| Fair | 28% | 48% | 19% | 4% | 2% |
| Open | 14% | 46% | 20% | 18% | 2% |
| Customer focused | 5% | 26% | 36% | 26% | 7% |
Question: Planning Inspectorate decisions, recommendations and advice, whether in your favour or not, are of a high quality
Results:
Strongly agree – 15%
Agree – 59%
Neutral – 20%
Disagree – 6%
Strongly disagree – 0%
Question: Which of these best describes the way you would speak of the Planning Inspectorate to other people or organisations?
Results:
Positively – 46%
Neutral – 43%
Negatively – 10%
Other - 2%