I've heard independently from a couple of professionals - one a quantity surveyor, the other an architect, that one of the consequences of cuts to local authority budgets is that work done by their planning departments now has to be paid for by the developers, and that it's taking far longer to get planning permission through. Those who like to demonise developers, and welcome any loading of costs on to them may think this no bad thing, but any such should reflect that it means development opportunities are reserved all the more for those with the resources to pay for planning consultants, whose time now must be at a premium, if not effectively rationed.
I'd say planning should be a public good. It should be about getting things right, and like other forms of justice, it should not be for sale. There's also an argument for economic efficiency, illustrated by just one part of the planning process, getting information about land ownership. I'm not sure how far they have got, but there are plans for the privatisation of the Land Registry, which has to be a bad idea, since it would create a private sector monopolist benefiting for taking a cut from every transaction and enquiry about land. From an economic point of view, it makes sense for such public goods to be provided free, as long as it can be demonstrated that the general public benefit of a better function property market outweighs the costs. The same arguments apply to planning in general, but instead, in response to accountancy driven understanding of how to save money, planning is being privatised, and no one benefits except the planning consultants.