Officers in the corridors of Shirehall are to be given extra powers to deal with planning applications behind closed doors – leading to fears objections and petitions on contentious issues will be ignored.

The Shropshire Council proposals are designed to meet targets and deal with planning applications more efficiently. Bosses say a number of applications have gone before the authority’s planning committee which could have been dealt with by officers.

But Peter Phillips, Lib Dem deputy group leader, said the proposals would reduce the ways and means of objecting to planning applications.

“It is outrageous and another example of Shropshire Council reducing the input of local people and local councils,” he said.

He claimed that currently, if six or more members of the public objected to an officer recommendation, the application went before a committee.

But this “trigger” is now to be removed, as are provisions allowing an application carrying a petition with more than 30 names to go forward to the committee.

Councillor Phillips said that half of all applications considered by planning committees were triggered by a parish or town council referral.

In future a committee chairman or vice chairman would be able to veto such a move, he claimed.

Councillor Phillips claimed the changes were aimed at enabling the council to meet targets for determining applications and is urging council colleagues to “raise a storm of protest”.

Councillor Malcolm Price,council cabinet member for planning and housing, said it was proposed that the planning committees would continue to deal with the “important issues”, leaving less contentious applications to be delegated to officers.

“These proposals recognise the importance of local councillors and community influence over planning decisions, and aim to ensure that the right balance is struck between delivering the planning service efficiently and locally,” said Councillor Price.

“Feedback from committee members confirms that there have been a number of occasions where applications have been considered by committee that should have between delegated to officers and this has also been taken into consideration when reviewing the scheme of delegation.”

By Dave Morris