Board meeting minutes 19th March 2026 - The Planning Inspectorate
Updated 8 June 2026
Applies to England
© Crown copyright 2026
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/board-meeting-minutes-the-planning-inspectorate/board-meeting-minutes-19th-march-2026-the-planning-inspectorate
Minutes 19th March 2026
| Planning Inspectorate Board Meetings | ||
| Date | 19 March 2026 | |
| Venue | Runway East Temple Meads, Bristol | |
| Chair | Trudi Elliott (TE), Non-Executive Director (NED) |
| Present | |
|---|---|
| Adrian Penfold (AP), Non-Executive Director (NED) | |
| Oliver Munn (OM), Non-Executive Director (NED) | |
| Emir Feisal (EF), Non-Executive Director (NED) | |
| Graham Stallwood (GS), Interim Chief Executive | |
| Joanne Butcher (JB), Chief Finance Officer | |
| Rachel Graham (RG), Chief Digital Information Officer | |
| Hayley Kelly (HK), Chief People Officer | |
| Rebecca Phillips (RP), Interim Chief Planning Inspector | |
| Tom Warth (TW), Interim Chief Operating Officer | |
| Laura Boxall (LB), Chief of Staff | |
| Manuela Solera-Deuchar (MS), MHCLG Representative |
In attendance
| Full meeting |
|---|
| Personal Assistant to the CDIO (FJ) minutes and actions |
| Observing |
|---|
| Inspector Training Support Officer (JB) |
| Planning Director (NC) |
| Attending for specific items |
|---|
| Senior Media and External Affairs Manager (GL) (item 5) |
| Customer Operations Manager (SM) (item 5) |
| Performance Reporting Manager (NR) (item 6) |
| Corporate Strategy & Reporting Lead (BM) (Item 9) |
| Futures Lead (NP) (Item 9) |
Apologies
N/A
1.0 - Welcome and Declaration of Interests
1.1 No new declarations of interest were declared.
2.0 - Minutes of March Board meeting, corporate action tracker 2.1 The action tracker was reviewed, with the GS confirming arrangements at ET to progress and close outstanding actions.
2.2 No amendments, corrections, or additions were raised by members.
Agreed:
2a) The Board approved Parts 1 and 2 of the previous minutes.
3.0 CEO update
3.1 Item is captured in part two minutes.
4.0 MHCLG update
4.1 Item is captured in part two minutes.
5.0 Stakeholder and customer engagement
5.1 GL presented insights from recent engagement activity. third annual Stakeholder Survey has launched, and early response rates are strong. The survey is a key reputational and performance benchmark against PINS stated values and behaviours.
5.2 The Board discussed the importance of resuming in person stakeholder engagement forums, particularly to coincide with the appointment of the new Chair and broader leadership and planning changes.
5.3 Strong support was expressed for in person Board meetings in July and September, with associated stakeholder events
5.4 Members emphasised the value of engaging beyond London and Bristol while noting the importance of including Bristol given its status as headquarters.
5.5 Board members reflected positively on recent in person staff briefings, noting high levels of staff engagement, pride, and optimism; positive feedback on leadership visibility and clarity; strong appreciation of new systems, particularly improved accessibility and usability.
5.6 SM reported a significant recovery in service performance, with service levels now consistently above target, despite staff attrition. He highlighted that SLAs are being met well beyond minimum thresholds, with strong average response times.
5.7 Backlogs have reduced materially year‑on‑year. Early use of first-time resolution data indicates high-quality responses and reduced follow-up contact
5.8 Clarification was if complaints related to decision substance are reviewed with professional leads, with customer services retaining accountability for decisions.
5.9 Members emphasised the importance of ensuring that processes for upheld complaints are formally documented, visible, and not reliant on institutional knowledge. It was noted that learning from complaints feeds into guidance, training, and communication.
5.10 LB asked the Board to confirm they note the Customer Roadmap plans for 26-27 as approved by ET highlighted in the paper which received acknowledgement in the room. Board were assured by SM and TW about the moves of customer service team members into the services taking place in early 26-27 and future spreading of responsibility for customer to more members of the service. Board heard plans for improvements to gathering customer insights through additional surveys by service, and were assured on how learnings from upheld complaints are shared and actioned within services and with input from Professional Leads
Agreed:
5a) Board agreed LB’s Customer Roadmap plans 26/27
Actions:
5b) GL and Secretariat to develop proposals for in person Board meetings in July and September, including associated stakeholder engagement events
5c) ZC and LB to confirm and, if necessary, document and communicate the formal end-to-end process for handling upheld complaints, including feedback, learning, and accountability pathways.
6.0 Balanced Scorecard
6.1 Item is captured in part two minutes.
7.0 Appeals Service: Productivity and Performance improvement achievements
7.1 TW set out how Appeals performance recovered following COVID‑related disruption, recruitment constraints and long‑standing timeliness issues. Open appeal cases peaked at c.14,000 (June 2023) and have since more than halved.
7.2 TW highlighted timeliness improvements:
- Percentage of cases determined within statutory / ministerial timescales has improved from c.23% to c.58%, with further improvement expected once enforcement written representations are fully addressed.
- 100% of enforcement hearings were delivered on time in the most recent reporting period.
7.3 Productivity has increased consistently over the past two years despite some planned interventions (e.g. expedited written reps) not yet coming into effect. This improvement was achieved without a reduction in decision quality, underpinned by strengthened quality assurance and closer involvement of professional leads.
7.4 The current risks to sustainability are performance can dip when management attention shifts elsewhere, highlighting the need for a more mature, self‑sustaining performance culture. The balance between timeliness and quality must continue to be actively managed and openly discussed.
7.5 The Board strongly commended the achievement, describing the paper as “joyful” and noting the scale of delivery against ambitious commitments
7.6 AP welcomed the forward‑looking nature of the paper and supported regular reporting of this type
7.7 MS confirmed the strong alignment with the Government’s productivity agenda and emphasised the importance of sustaining momentum to support Ministers’ delivery priorities within the Parliamentary cycle.
Actions:
7a) TW to update and present a forward‑looking 2027/28 Productivity Improvement Plan to the Board, building on this paper, in place of regular forward‑looking productivity updates.
7b) TW and RP to continue review of inspector training approaches (including modular and blended models) and report on effectiveness and risks as recruitment continues.
8.0 Future approach to productivity in our Services
8.1 TW outlined proposals to apply lessons from Appeals to all services, noting that productivity has not been consistently measured elsewhere due to lower volumes, variable data and differing service models.
8.2 Core pillars of future approach:
- Consistent productivity measures across services (with service‑specific metrics where appropriate).
- Governance and assurance, embedding productivity KPIs into executive oversight and service management.
- Digital and data roadmaps owned by services, prioritising initiatives with the greatest productivity impact (including AI).
- Benefits tracking, linking investment decisions to expected productivity outcomes and monitoring delivery.
- Performance culture, including high‑performing teams work, clearer goals and stronger line management capability.
- External levers, using service‑level stakeholder management to identify systemic blockers.
8.3 TW asked for the Board views on whether PINS should sometimes accept reduced internal productivity where changes would materially improve the whole planning system, and how such trade‑offs should be assessed and authorised
8.4 EF supported the direction of travel and emphasised the importance of clearly linking outcome indicators, management indicators, individual objectives over time and a future deep dive on the Performance Working Group, its processes and reporting.
8.5 AP advised caution on system‑wide trade‑offs, stressing that decisions which reduce PINS productivity should normally be explicitly authorised by Government, not taken unilaterally.
8.6 MS agreed, noting Ministers’ strong focus on delivery and productivity; any productivity trade‑off would need a very clear and compelling case.
8.7 Chair and others reinforced that: systemic improvements that also benefit PINS productivity are priority and wider system interventions should be pursued collaboratively with the Department.
Actions:
8a) TW and Service Owners to develop and implement consistent productivity measures and governance arrangements across all services, informed by Appeals lessons.
8b) Secretariat to schedule a Board deep dive on the Performance Working Group and performance culture, including escalation routes and assurance.
8c) Chair and GS to develop clear principles for when and how PINS would support system‑wide productivity improvements that may impact internal performance, including escalation to the Department ### 9.0 Future Strategy
9.1 Item is captured in part two minutes.
AOB, review of meeting, key points for the blog
10.1 OM and GS confirmed they will draft the post meeting staff blog
10.2 AP raised whether a formal exit interview / debrief would be conducted for the outgoing Chair.
10.3 MS agreed this was a helpful suggestion and undertook to take it away for consideration.
10.4 The Board formally noted and endorsed the Terms of Reference for Board, ARAC and Remuneration Committee
10.5 LB highlighted the absence of Health & Safety from the forward programme. The Chair stressed that good board practice requires at least one annual Board level review of Health & Safety.
10.6 GS noted that the order and structure of Board papers could be improved to provide a clearer narrative flow
Actions:
10a) GS and secretariat review the structure and sequencing of Board papers (CEO report, performance, risk, scorecard) to improve clarity and reduce duplication.
10b) Chair and secretariat Identify when Health & Safety was last reviewed at Board level and schedule an annual Health & Safety item on the forward agenda.