A call to bring to an end a special Pembrokeshire Council panel which decides whether some planning applications should be considered by councillors rather than planning officers is to be discussed further.

A notice of motion submitted by Councillor Huw Murphy to the July meeting of Pembrokeshire Council asked: “That council consider disbanding the Planning Delegation Panel (PDP) and review the current arrangements so that planning applications delegated to officers for refusal, where a member requests further consideration, are referred directly to the Planning Committee rather than first being considered by the PDP.”

It continued: “Under the current arrangements within Pembrokeshire County Council, where a planning application has been delegated to officers and a refusal is recommended, the local county councillor may request that the application be considered by the PDP.

“The PDP then determines whether the application should proceed to full planning committee. It is considered that this additional stage introduces unnecessary bureaucracy into the planning process, leading to increased delays and costs for applicants.

“The current process can also be perceived as limiting democratic oversight, as applications may be refused by the panel without being considered by full planning committee, whose elected members bring local knowledge, experience transparency and democratic accountability to planning decisions.

County Hall Pembrokeshire
Pembrokeshire County Council (Stock image)

“By comparison, the Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority, which is responsible for planning across more than 30 per cent of the land area of Pembrokeshire, does not operate a planning delegation panel. Instead, planning matters are considered through its established planning procedures, and this approach appears to function effectively without the need for a PDP.”

“The removal of the PDP should simplify decision-making, reduce bureaucracy, improve transparency and democratic accountability, and reduce the workload of Democratic Services.”

At the July meeting, members agreed the notice of motion would be referred to the council’s constitutional review committee for further consideration.