Automate selected CPC processes

July 2025

To answer any questions from members of the public.

The following question was asked: The planning committee puts a lot of effort into reviewing each Claygate planning application, whether it comes from a resident wishing to construct a simple extension or a property developer hoping to build multiple homes on green belt land. • But it has no obligation to do so. Examining planning applications is not part of the charter between the parish council and Elmbridge. • Indeed, it is duplicating the work of Elmbridge planning officers who also review every planning application and have the ultimate say on whether each application is permitted or turned down. If our planning committee and the Elmbridge planning officer disagree on an application, it seems that the planning officer always wins. The parish council has the right to have its opinion on any planning application considered by Elmbridge, but then so does every Claygate resident. Given that the pay-off for all your effort is so low, I'm amazed that you carry on. • I believe Elmbridge has told the parish council that it has no plans before it is terminated to reinstate the arrangement whereby an objection by the parish council to a planning application would mean that the application had to be reviewed by a committee of Elmbridge councillors. • At any other tier of local government, or any commercial organisation where resource is tight, such a degree of redundancy would not be tolerated. • When questioned about its insistence on reviewing every planning application, the planning committee's explanations have been threefold: Firstly, that the committee consists of unpaid volunteers, with the implication that they can spend their time how they wish. Secondly that, though unqualified, the planning committee may identify an issue that the Elmbridge staff officer might otherwise miss. And thirdly, there seems to be a claim of an educational benefit: the argument seems to be that our planning committee should continue duplicating Elmbridge staff officer work in order to keep its own skills alive, just in case such skills are suddenly needed in two years' time when the new unitary authority is in place. But if the planning committee needs to keep its skills alive, why is it considering delegating this task to AI software? If the parish council pays to employ an AI machine to evaluate planning applications, the training argument vanishes, and the parish council would simply be paying for an AI program to produce output which Elmbridge would again overrule. If any tier of government should be buying such software, it ought to be Elmbridge. The parish council is meant to be a focal point for residents, not a mouthpiece for the views of robots. Cllr Collon responded as follows: It’s not the Act, but an Order made under a power conferred by the Act on the Secretary of State: the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015, SI 2015/595. Article 25 is the relevant article. You will see that it requires parish councils to submit their representations, or say they will not be submitting representations, within 21 days. Since we only meet every 28 days, for a week of applications each month we cannot comply with this deadline. However in practice the deadline is almost invariably much longer, and when it is not, we ask EBC for an extension which they always grant. You say that the planning officers always have the last word, and so they do, because that is what the law prescribes. The only exceptions are when an application is referred to the Planning Committee or a Sub-Committee, or if it goes to appeal. And soon they will have the last word even more often. The Planning and Infrastructure Bill, now wending its way through Parliament (it has gone through the Commons and is currently in Committee in the Lords — the first day was yesterday) has a provision (currently clause 51, though the number will change) allowing the Secretary of State to make regulations on what should be decided by planning officers and what can go to committees. So early next year Angela Rayner will be telling our Elmbridge Councillors: (a) that they can’t decide anything unless they have had training, and (b) that even then there are very few cases that they can keep to themselves; the planning officers will almost always have the last word. The idea is to speed up the planning process, and so it would, except that the Government (in the shape of the same Angela Rayner) has introduced the Devolution Bill which, when passed, will uproot the whole of local government, planning included.

(extract from Planning Committee meeting, 17th July 2025, item 5)

To discuss the Cloudy IT Systems and agree any action required.

Cllr Bray noted that, as a result of the Zoom demo on 6th May, colleagues had been impressed by the system and had asked him to pursue our interest. There were really only two matters of significance to look into, namely: [1] the issue of loading EBC Planning Department documents onto the system, and [2] reassurance as to the quality of the GovAssist output. NVA John Burns appears to have solved issue [1], so only item [2] remains. Insofar as this is concerned, the CloudyIT contact, Steve Walker, appears to have been ill for some weeks, and has only recently re-engaged with us. The main point he made most recently is that CloudyIT hopes to release a significantly improved version of GovAssist in October, and has recommended we leave the “proof of concept” stage until then.”

(extract from Planning Committee meeting, 17th July 2025, item 11)

June 2025

Action №	Date Created	Description	By	Status
P㉕019	19-JUN-25	To circulate the CloudyIT paper to councillors.	Cllr Bray	COMPLETED BY 17-JUL

May 2025

9.

Review planning correspondence, notification of applications and outstanding results and agree any action required. .

Cllr Bray informed the Councillors regarding the CloudyIT System and reported on the demo attended on the 6th May. The Planning members also attended. It would be approximately £1,200 + VAT to proceed, including a one-time set-up charge. There was a discussion as to whether this would be able to access applications on the EBC website or not? It was agreed to add this to the next agenda for more information and discussion. ACTION - Clerk P㉕015

March 2025

To consider buying a licence from CloudyIT for the GovAssist product.

It was agreed that we would request a demonstration of this product before deciding to buy a licence. The trial is free and would require a dedicated evening of Councillors for this. It was agreed that the AI tool would help to expedite planning applications. Cllr Bray to look into booking a trial demo which would be held on a Thursday evening. Proposed by Cllr Sheppard and seconded by Cllr Holt. Carried unanimously. ACTION – Cllr Bray P㉕009

(extract from Planning Committee meeting, 27th March 2025, item 14)