Why are some councils losing planning controls?

Two of a county's councils have been sanctioned by the government over the way they handle planning applications.

The move means that decisions about major projects in the Hertfordshire areas of Dacorum and Hertsmere could be made by central government rather than local councillors.

Both authorities say they are disappointed by the move.

But why has this happened and what does it mean for people living in those areas?

Under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the secretary of state for local government can take action against (or "designate") local authorities if there are concerns about the way they handle planning applications.

The sanction is that major applications may be taken out of the council's hands and into those of the secretary of state.

In reality, this means that the decisions would be made by a planning inspector.

The government said both authorities were "not adequately performing their function of determining applications for planning permission for major development".

Dacorum Borough Council said the designation related to decisions made between April 2023 and March 2025, and subsequent appeal decisions up to the end of 2025.

Hertsmere Borough Council said the government's decision related to the proportion of major planning applications refused and overturned at planning appeal between 2023 and 2025.

If the government exercises its power to sanction a council, a developer who submits a planning application can choose whether the local authority or the secretary of state will make the decision.

So, a developer might opt for the secretary of state if there is a history of similar projects being turned down by the council.

Alternatively, the developer might choose the council if there is local support for the project or to limit the costs of preparing the application.

Sally Symington, the leader of the Liberal Democrat-run council, said: "We are disappointed by this designation, particularly as it reflects decisions from a past period and does not recognise the significant improvements we have already made.

"Our performance has improved considerably and the council's allowed appeals have already returned within the government's acceptable limits.

Adrian England, the portfolio holder for place, said: "This is a power grab, plain and simple.

"Just as our council is on the cusp of finally getting a local plan in place, after years of Conservative failure to deliver one, the government are shutting out local communities."

The authority said it was "disappointed to have been designated as this in no way reflects our appetite for working with developers and investors on major projects".

It added: "The designation is based on a very small number of appeal decisions – six out of 40 appeals decided in that time.

"It is not a reflection of the overall performance of the council's planning service, or the many hundreds of planning applications determined each year."

The Labour-led authority added that it "remains committed to ensuring that planning decisions are robust, transparent and evidence based".

The leader of the council, Jeremy Newmark, blamed the government's decision on members of the planning committee, who he accused of "political point-scoring" in their decision-making.

Not necessarily.

It might seem that applying to an inspector instead of a council that is often found to have refused permission unnecessarily would be a good bet.

But the planning inspectorate would still be required to take into account published national and local strategic plans when deciding whether to approve applications.

While a decision made by a council could be subject to the appeals process, a determination by an inspector would be final.

The only way to challenge it would be via the expensive and time-consuming route of a judicial review application.

Whereas developers can work with local planning officers when a council is considering an application, similar assistance is not provided by the planning inspectorate.

The designation will last as long as the government wants it to.

It will stay in place until the secretary of state believes sufficient improvement has been made in the way planning applications are decided.

As an example, the council in Uttlesford, Essex, was designated in February 2022, and received all its planning powers back in June 2025.

St Albans City and District Council was designated in March 2024 and was reprieved in June 2025.

Victoria Collins, the Liberal Democrat MP for Harpenden, said she would be "pressing ministers to reverse this decision and to back, not punish, councils working hard for local communities".

She added that Dacorum had been "caught between a rock and a hard place" with "more rules, more applications and… no extra funding".

Harvey Cohen, the Conservative shadow spokesperson on planning at Hertsmere, said: "This is not good news for our residents, for the council, its finances or its reputation.

"This is the direct result of Labour's national planning policy to turn Hertsmere's green belt into grey belt and allow developers free reign to put in planning applications on green belt."

According to the Local Democracy Reporting Service, Brett Rosehill, a Reform UK representative and member of Hertsmere's planning committee, said the decision to place Hertsmere in special measures had been "a humiliating moment for the authority" that meant local control had been "weakened", and residents were "paying the price for years of political failure".

Do you have a story suggestion for Beds, Herts or Bucks? Contact us below.

Follow Beds, Herts and Bucks news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.