The Borough Council of Hounslow met on Wednesday 21 October 2026 to discuss and approve changes to the Planning Committee's terms of reference, necessitated by new national planning legislation. The council also considered appointments to various council bodies following these changes.

Changes to the Council's Constitution: Planning Committee Terms of Reference

The council considered revised terms of reference for the Planning Committee, which are required to comply with the Planning and Infrastructure Act 2025 and the Town and Country Planning Regulations 2026. These legislative changes introduce a national scheme of delegation for planning applications and limit planning committees to a maximum of 13 members.

Councillor Shantanu Rajawat, Leader of the Council, introduced the report, explaining that the changes were a legal requirement for all local planning authorities in England. He proposed approving the revised terms of reference, appointing the Chair of the Planning Committee as the Council's nominated member and the Vice-Chair as their deputy, and appointing the Director of Planning and Buildings as the Council's nominated officer with provision for deputies. The Monitoring Officer was also authorised to make any minor consequential amendments to the Constitution.

During the debate, Councillor Jack Emsley BEM expressed concern about the necessity of an additional meeting, stating it was due to the administration botching legally required constitutional changes. He argued that the council's reputation had been damaged, citing negative press coverage. Councillor Emsley stated, We're here to bail out the administration after it botched legally required constitutional changes.

Councillor Roger Crouch also spoke against the proposals, describing them as another assault on democracy and a further example of devolution that diminishes councillors and leaves residents voiceless. He expressed concern that centralising power in the hands of the director of planning and the chair of the planning committee was dangerous and undemocratic.

Councillor Theo Dennison echoed these sentiments, calling the national proposals an abomination both nationally and locally. He criticised the administration for a lack of imagination in finding ways to retain a voice for the public in planning decisions and for councillors to have a role.

Following debate, the council voted to proceed to a vote on the revised terms of reference, which was carried with 32 in favour, 20 against, and 8 abstentions. Subsequently, the substantive motion regarding the revised terms of reference was carried with 44 in favour and 19 against, with no abstentions.

Appointments to Council Bodies

Following the approval of the changes to the Planning Committee's terms of reference, the council also considered appointments to various council bodies. These appointments were necessary due to the change in the size of the Planning Committee and adjustments in political group sizes.

Councillor Shantanu Rajawat moved the report, noting that an amendment was required as Councillor Guy Lambert was no longer part of the Green Group. He proposed appointing 12 members to the Planning Committee, leaving the 13th vacant pending further process. The rest of the nominations were as per the report.

Councillor Tony Brown stated his group would support the Labour Group's proposals, believing they had made a real effort to reflect the change in the Council composition. He noted that the newly independent Councillor Lambert had indicated he would support the Labour Group, meaning they still held a de facto majority. He highlighted the Audition Governance Committee as an example of fair representation, with three Labour councillors, two Conservative councillors, and himself, which he considered a fair reflection of proportionality.

Councillor Darshan Nagi argued that Labour no longer had an overall majority but still expected to control committees and retain chairmanships. He stated, This is now a Council with no overall control, and that should be reflected in how our committees operate.

Councillor Linden Grigg expressed his dissatisfaction with the allocation of roles on committees, particularly committee chairs, stating the proposal was nothing but an attempt by Shantanu Rajawat and his band of brigands to prop up his tottering of administration.

Councillor Adrian Page stated that his reform councillors would support the motion as it was reasonable and equitable.

The council then moved to a vote on the appointments. The vote to proceed to a vote was carried with 32 in favour, 20 against, and 8 abstentions. Subsequently, the vote on the substantive motion regarding the appointments was carried with 44 in favour and 19 against, with no abstentions.