National changes to the way planning application decisions are taken – which will restrict the type of proposals that can be determined by councillors rather than officers – have been blasted by borough cllrs across the political spectrum.

From October 31 a new mandatory national scheme of planning delegations will come into force, which will put tighter requirements on the type of planning applications that can be called in by cllrs for consideration by Stafford Borough Council's planning committee.

The majority of planning application decisions are taken by council officers.

Some, such as large-scale developments, are put forward to the planning committee, and borough cllrs can call in applications to the committee if concerns are raised about them by residents.

But the new National Scheme of Planning Delegation will mean that an application can only be referred "if a nominated officer and a nominated member agree that the application raises one or more issues of economic, social or environmental significance to the local area, or one or more significant planning matters having regard to the development plan and other material considerations," a council report said.

It added: "Up until now, councils have been able to determine locally when decisions should be referred for determination by committee rather than officers.

This has led to different schemes and decision making procedures being adopted across the country.

"The government states that its aim behind the national scheme of delegation is to ensure that there is greater clarity and consistency about the role of planning committees in planning decision making.

Committees should focus on the key proposals that matter to an area, enabling other, often more minor and technical, decisions to be made by planning officers."

At Tuesday's full council meeting, elected members were asked to amend the authority's constitution to reflect the changes.

But many councillors spoke out against the national scheme in a debate that lasted around an hour.

Cllr Ant Reid, cabinet member for economic development and planning, told the meeting: "This has been mandated to us, these are the rules, amending our policy to match a Government mandate that every council will then perform to the same rules.

"It's taking away some of our rights to be able to vary our policy based on our local needs and our residents.

"It's good news for national developers and it's bad news for residents.

"But we have to do this – if we don't pass this, we will have an unlawful policy on November 1 and any planning decision this council makes is therefore at risk from legal problems.

"Call-ins now have to have significant interest to the local area.

"This sounds like a good idea, because you don't want petty things coming through, but it's a bad idea because local cllrs, the chair of planning and officers now need to say what is local significance."

He called on fellow members to vote for the Officer Scheme of Delegation in the council's constitution be amended – or abstain from voting if they did not agree with the proposals.

But other cllrs said they would be voting against the move.

Conservative member Cllr Roy James said: "What's going to happen to all of the call-ins that are currently on the books if they're not going to be dealt with before 31st October?

"I think you will find you will have a lot of disgruntled people.

"I spent 35 years defending this country and its democracy and this is an erosion of our democracy.

"I will not accept from anybody taking away my democracy or the democracy I represent for the people of this borough.

"I would like everyone to vote against this in principle.

"I understand you have got to vote for the legal side, but we need to stand up and show the people of this borough we are here for democracy and will not be dictated to by other people."

Fellow Conservative Cllr Marnie Philips said: "There are plenty of applications that have come to the planning committee that have been improved as a result of being put before the planning committee.

"There are changes that have come about that the officers hadn't even considered – they're changes for the better."

Stafford Borough Independents member Brendan McKeown, the current chair of the planning committee, said: "It's completely crazy – members of the planning committee more often than not improve a planning committee because of that local knowledge and extra bit of experience.

"I cannot believe for a minute this will improve the situation for the people of this borough – planning is the forward-facing part of this council and people rely on us to see democracy being done."

Green Party member Cllr Emma Carter called for an amendment to the proposal, to enable the council to record its concerns that the changes would have a negative impact on the borough and democracy, while it acknowledged that regulations had changed.

She added: "We need to acknowledge this is a really poor thing to happen.

"This is about corporate interest, developer interest and profits.

"Whilst I do take on board completely and acknowledge the law has changed,

"I think it's right we take a personal stand."

Fellow Green Party member Cllr Scott Spencer said: "It doesn't seem to matter where we go here – it's going to be forced on us.

"We are going to have to abide by this, but with this amendment it's about making a stand."

But Labour member Cllr Andy McNaughton said: "I would like to speak in support of the motion.

"I don't see why local democracy should sometimes override the national interest.

"Sometimes things need to be done nationally and local democracy tries to stop that.

"The council officers know what they are doing – you only have to read a planning document and the rules and regulations.

"I find the planning committee to be very negative.

"The first thing people do when a planning application comes in is to try and find a way to stop it."

Cllrs voted unanimously in favour of the amendment to record their concerns about the National Scheme of Planning Delegation.

The amendment to the Officer Scheme of Delegation in the council's constitution was also passed by 17 votes, with 12 members against and two abstentions.

Speaking after the meeting, Cllr Rob Kenney from Stafford Borough Independents said: "We did not have a choice about whether the national scheme would apply; our choice was between amending the constitution in an orderly and lawful way or leaving the council exposed to legal challenge, wasted expenditure and potentially serious financial consequences. In those circumstances, adopting the necessary constitutional changes was the only responsible course of action."