| Phase 1 |
This component introduces a new, structured format for public consultations on major planning This component introduces a new, structured format for public consultations on major planning applications, with an immediate beta-stage rollout focused on applications submitted under the tilted balance. These out-of-plan schemes carry significant public impact and require urgent attention to transparency. Rather than waiting for a finalised model, EHDC is encouraged to adopt an agile development approach: iteratively improving consultation materials and formats based on early use and feedback.
The format is inspired by how Switzerland educates its citizens before referenda and Sweden’s legally embedded plain language principles, formalised in the Swedish Language Act (2009:600), which requires public communication to be “cultivated, simple and comprehensible.”
Effective communication is the foundation of meaningful engagement. Without tailoring public consultations to the needs and understanding of their intended audience — as is now widely recognised in law and policy as a basic requirement for fair consultation — such processes risk becoming a performative exercise: a ‘fake until you make it’ format that undermines democratic trust.
⚖️ Systemic Imbalance
In practice, unfair or inaccessible consultations are almost never taken to court — not because they’re fair, but because ordinary people don’t have the time, legal knowledge, or financial means to mount a Judicial Review. Developers can afford legal teams to defend their interests; most residents cannot even access theirs. This imbalance allows flawed consultations to continue unchecked, undermining the law’s intent.
If a system claims to value fairness but only makes it enforceable for those with power or money, it is not a fair system — it is a broken one. The law expects meaningful consultation. Councils have a duty to deliver it — not just legally, but ethically.
The aim is to ensure that the public can not only comment on proposals, but genuinely understand them — and receive clear responses on whether their input was considered, why, and how.
Major applications must present key information in plain English, clearly define planning terms (especially material considerations), and gather feedback using a guided questionnaire format.
This format should include:
- A plain-language summary of the proposed development.
- A glossary defining key planning concepts and material considerations.
- A structured set of public-facing questions (tick-box + optional comment fields).
- A postcode-searchable interface allowing residents to find nearby developments, track consultations, and optionally opt in to a ‘notify me’ alert system. Residents could be notified when applications arise within a defined radius of their postcode, ensuring people affected by shared infrastructure or cumulative impacts are not overlooked.
- A reporting tool that shows whether public concerns were:
- Material,
- Mitigated, or
- Not considered material (with reason given).
The outcome of consultation must be available publicly, and linked to named officers or agents responsible for addressing each category of concern.
This mirrors elements of Swiss referenda — where citizens are educated about policy choices in a structured and accessible way — and introduces early democratic accountability into local planning.
| Component | Participatory Public Consultation Format |
| What It Delivers | Ensures the public can meaningfully engage in consultations and that objections are transparently assessed. |
| Function | Converts public consultation into a question-led, accountable format where outcomes are tracked and reported. |
| Legal Basis | NPPF paragraphs 39–41; best practice in community engagement; discretionary local planning procedure. |
| Completion Criteria | Major developments must include a plain-language, questionnaire-format consultation with defined planning terms and tracked responses. |
| How to Implement | Develop EHDC template guidance for developers. Require results to be published, searchable by postcode, and uploaded alongside planning applications. |
| Timeline | Piloted within 3–6 months |
| Owner | Community Engagement Officers / Planning Officers |
