'An attack on democracy' - Bedford councillors clash in row over new planning rules

During a full council meeting on Wednesday (November 11), members debated the impact of the previously opposed arrangements, which change how planning applications are referred to committees and the role which elected councillors can play in the process.

Conservative councillor Graeme Coombes criticised the reforms, arguing that they would take decision-making further away from communities.

He said: “We need to do absolutely everything to protect our communities from the Labour government’s attack on local democracy. We need to call it what it is – it is taking powers away.”

Fellow conservative councillor James Weir also raised concerns, arguing that compliance with national legislation should not mean abandoning local representation.

“Under the new regime, ward councillors lose their call-in rights, parish council objections no longer trigger committee consideration, and even substantial public opposition may not result in public hearing.

“However, compliance with the law should not mean abandoning local representation, wherever it can still play a role. If councillors can no longer formally call in applications, their local knowledge should nevertheless carry significant weight when considering whether an application raises issues of local significance. The voices of local ward members remain one of the best indicators of community concern and local impact.

“The legislation may limit our discretion, but it does not require us to minimise democratic involvement.”

However, Labour councillor James Valentine argues that councillors could still influence planning applications without formally calling them in.

He said: “A call-in is a means to an end, but not the end in itself. The end is to represent our residents.”

Cllr Valentine described how he had previously worked with planning officers to identify errors in a housing application, which was subsequently withdrawn before an appeal was rejected by a planning inspector.

He added: “A call-in? Fine. But if you are a hardworking councillor and you listen to your community there’s an awful lot you can do, and I do find all this anti-Labour, throwing democracy down the river, is exaggerated.”

Other councillors questioned whether the current concerns over local democracy were rooted in the national reforms, arguing that previous decisions by the council had already affected planning and impacted the council’s power.

Liberal Democrat councillor Henry Vann pointed to the failure to deliver a local plan, agreeing with comments made by Independent councillor Doug McMurdo and Green councillor Ben Foley.

Cllr Vann said: “Councillor McMurdo and Foley’s spot-on assessments of where we are with democracy and planning locally, as a result of the failure to deliver a local plan when that option was available.”

Alongside the debate, councillors also unanimously backed an amendment proposed by Conservative councillor Marc Frost, seeking additional safeguards around the new planning arrangements.

The amendment included provisions for a clearer process around applications considered to be of significance, alongside a formal review of the arrangements after six months.

Questions remain over how significance will be defined and how additional safeguards will operate in practice.