Transparency data

Board meeting minutes 21st July 2022 - The Planning Inspectorate

Updated 17 April 2024

Applies to England

Minutes 22 September 2022 date

Title of meeting	Planning Inspectorate Board Meetings
Date	21 July 2022
Venue	Virtual
Chair	Trudi Elliott

Present	Planning Inspectorate Board Meeting
Stephen Tetlow	Non-Executive Director
Rebecca Driver	Non-Executive Director
Sally Dixon	Non-Executive Director
Sarah Richard	Chief Executive
Graham Stallwood	Director of Operations
Navees Rahman	Director of Corporate Services
Sean Canavan	Director of Strategy
Simon Gallagher	Director of Planning, DLUHC

In attendance	Planning Inspectorate Board Meeting
Sponsorship Team (RW), DLUHC
Strategic Governance Officer (NP), minutes
PA to Director of Operation (DP), meeting support
Chief Digital Information Officer (RG), item 5
Project Manager (AC), item 6
Professional Lead, Local Plans (JY), item 7

Apologies	Planning Inspectorate Board Meeting
Head of Strategy & Change (KT)

1. Welcome and Declaration of Interests

1.1 The Chair called for Declarations of Interest, of which there were none.

2. Minutes of May and June Board meetings and corporate action tracker

2.1 No further comments were received for the May Board minutes, parts one and two.

2.2 Amendment required for the June minutes, paragraph 2.1, bullet point one should read cited.

2.3 No further comments received on the action tracker.

Agreed:

2a) Subject to the amendment at 2.2, the minutes of the May and June Board meetings are an accurate record of the meeting.

3. Audit and Risk Assurance Committee (ARAC) update to the Board

3.1 RD as Chair of ARAC gave the following update to the Board:

• The resourcing issues in the organisation are impacting on performance in terms of controls and risk management.

• Risk management processes and approach to risk appetite is maturing, there is a plan in place to make further improvements, progression is dependent on resourcing.

• ARAC also discussed wider risks which are not within the Inspectorate’s control and how to escalate through the department. SG suggested a conversation between the team at the Inspectorate and the department to discuss escalation processes.

Agreed:

3a) The Board noted the update from the ARAC Chair.

Actions:

3b) SG to discuss risk escalation process with DLUHC and Inspectorate teams.

4. Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities update

4.1 SG gave the following DLUHC update to the Board:

• New Prime Minister to be appointed on the 5th September and possibly new Ministers too.

• The new Prime Minister will have the same issues to manage i.e. cost of living, economical performance and priority actions.

• The department continues to focus on delivery.

4.2 The Board took the opportunity to congratulate SG on his new role, SG will be leaving the department at the beginning of October and the September Board will be SG’s last.

Agreed:

4a) The Board noted the update from the department.

5. Performance dashboard, including Operational Performance

5.1 Timeliness

• Written representation cases follow the overall trend.

• Most hearing cases which could not be progressed during the pandemic have now been held, this is having an impact on the overall trend and percentile as we move through the older cases.

• Inquiries peaked in March and April, the number of weeks to progress an inquiry case has reduced to 39 weeks.

• Our data enables us to understand the outlier cases which can include cases for redetermination, probate, case specific reasons etc. This data helps us to understand performance and complexities of individual cases.

• Local Plan (LP) performance is variable and is often controlled by external factors. There has been a reduction in plans submitted over time, but we are now starting to see submissions rise. We are expecting 72 plans to be submitted before the new arrangements are implemented, but this number could change.

• In preparation for LP submissions, we are training more Inspectors.

• The Board discussed the LP process, GS explained Inspectors work full time on LPs, but do pick up other casework and tasks whilst waiting for evidence to be submitted by the parties. RD asked for data to be added which sets out how long the LP is with the Inspectorate and how much time it is with other parties. JY had drafted a report setting out some of the information. NP to share with the Board.

• ST is interested to know, how efficiency is improving and the measures of efficiency per person, how better and efficient are we getting. Not just focussing on the historical data, would like to see the forecast data. RG explained good progress had been made on forecasting, this has now stalled due to resourcing. Work is taking place with the Operations team to understand the variability and differences. ST asked to see the broad estimate over the next few months.

• The Board discussed forecasting further and the variance between NSIP and appeal forecasting, where more is known about the NSIP cases as discussions take place with the parties. SG asked if we could collect the number of hours spent on cases as a proxy, how much time is lapsed and not active working hours. GS explained ODT will give us more information, will be based on analysis of hours available rather than recording of different tasks. The new service will give us better data.

• GS explained ODT is about improving the internal process and the user experience for both our case teams and the customer. The service team and operations managers will look at how to improve efficiencies and the metrics required.

5.2 Open cases

• More cases were received than closed over the last quarter.

• TE asked if this trend is expected to continue over the summer? RG explained it is likely to continue through the summer as people take leave and demand continues.

• Planning inquiry cases are balancing, with a similar number of cases closed and received.

• More planning hearing cases have been closed than received. The first hearing decision under the pilot to improve hearing performance will be issued in August.

• Focus on enforcement cases continues and additional Inspectors are joining to progress this casework.

• The Data and Performance team have received some parliamentary questions; RG will share the topics with the Board.

• NSIPs – 93 open applications, 69 are at pre-application stage, 16 expected with a further 9 expected at the end of the year. This is a record level of submissions for NSIPs.

5.3 People data

• Work is underway between the HR and Finance teams to gather vacancy data and updating our internal system. This will give a clear picture of the number of vacancies in the organisation and an extract can be produced for reporting purposes. This work also contributes to the mitigations for Strategic Risk s23 – current skills gap.

• ARAC had discussed recruitment and the time taken to recruit into the Inspectorate. RD asked how the Inspectorate’s recruitment process compared to other government departments. NR explained the Civil Service Commissioner sets the rules for recruitment and these are audited by the Commission. The scope for an innovation project around skills and how/ where we are bringing these skills in is underway and should be amended to include the recruitment process.

• As part of recruitment, SD suggested focus around the flexibility in location and working patterns, development, linking to diversity and inclusion and the reflecting the communities we serve.

• SG reflected some of the recruitment issues faced by the Inspectorate is wider. Recruitment of digital skills is a challenge across government, whilst recruitment of Planning Professionals is across the planning system. SG supports the innovation project on recruitment.

• ST and the Board asked NR and the innovation project to really look at the recruitment process with a view to removing barriers for those wishing to join the organisation, and to look at our visibility. Making it easier for people to find out about the Inspectorate and the roles we have on offer.

Actions:

5a) RG to update the dashboard with the following data:

• how long the Local Plan is with the Inspectorate and how much time it is with other parties.

• how efficiency is improving and the measures of efficiency per person, how better and efficient are we getting and include the forecast data.

6b) NP to share JY Local Plan paper with the Board.

6c) RG to share the topics of parliamentary questions answered/ contributed to by the Data and Performance team.

6d) NR and the innovation project to review the recruitment process with a view to removing barriers, being clear about what we have to offer and also look at our visibility and make it easier for people to find out about the Inspectorate and the roles we have on offer.

6. Planning Reform, Project Speed and the Energy Strategy update (OFFICIAL SENSITIVE)

6.1 OFFICIAL SENSITIVE item captured as part two minutes.

7. Local Plans Quality Framework

7.1 JY as Professional Lead for Local Plans (LPs) gave the following update to the Board:

• The LPs quality framework is defined as processing LPs as quickly as possible, in accordance with nation policy and free from error.

• Measures for LPs are not straightforward as the timescale sits with the local planning authority (LPA) to deliver a sound plan. The LP process ends when the LP is found sound.

• Most plans take between a year and a year and half. During this time Inspectors either work full time on the LP or do other things whilst waiting for evidence.

• High court challenges are a hard measure of quality, of 11 challenges, one was lost due to inaccurate data. There are currently two cases outstanding.

• Every Inspector is observed at least once a year and scenario-based training sessions have ran on event management. A webinar with QCs was also held on how to make an examination as effective as possible to give an outside perspective.

7.2 JY talked the Board through a recent survey of Inspectors and participants of LPs.

• Feedback from Inspectors was positive, particularly around support, advice and training, management of LP work, allocation and line management.

• Concerns were raised around joint appointments on some examinations, JY is taking forward the issues raised on joint appointments to understand the difficulties.

• Concerns were also raised around the pace of the examination due to planning officer resource and availability.

• Participant feedback raised concerns around the examination taking too long, people found technical and difficult to understand.

• In response a new guide for first time participants has been produced, short videos to explain the process are also being produced, the guidance note for Inspectors has been reviewed and planning officer training is being offered.

7.3 Feedback and reviews show the quality framework is making a difference and we are seeking external accreditation of the LP framework and taking documents through plain English accreditation.

Agreed:

7a) The Board took the opportunity to thank JY for the update and for his work in Local Plans as JY retires from the Inspectorate in September.

8. Forward Look,

8.1 The Board agreed the September Board agenda with the addition of an update on the resourcing innovation project.