AI Generated

Weekly updates

Open Council Network is an independent organisation. We report on Greater London Authority and are not the council. About us

London Plan: Housing, Green Belt & Transport Debated

This week in Greater London Authority:

Grooming Gangs: Harrowing Testimonies Expose Deep-Rooted Failures in Protecting London's Children

The Police and Crime Committee met on Wednesday, 9 September 2026, to confront the devastating reality of grooming gangs operating in London. Experts shared harrowing accounts of child sexual exploitation, detailing how these criminal networks prey on the most vulnerable. The committee heard that despite increased attention, the true scale of the problem remains unknown due to fragmented data and systemic failures. The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) acknowledged past shortcomings in its response to child sexual exploitation, including historical issues with data recording and victim support.

The Hidden Scale of the Problem

The committee heard that the term grooming gangs is widely understood by the public but is not a precise legal or operational term used by the MPS. Experts suggested focusing on the harms experienced by victims and the group-based nature of the offending, rather than a specific label, to ensure no one falls through the cracks. The MPS acknowledged that while they do not underestimate the scale of the problem, the hidden nature of exploitation, particularly online, means the true extent is difficult to ascertain. They are actively working to improve data collection, including ethnicity data, and are committed to a Child First approach in their investigations.

Challenges in Identification and Investigation

A significant challenge identified was the difficulty in identifying perpetrators and victims due to fragmented data systems and a lack of consistent definitions across agencies. The MPS acknowledged historical shortcomings in data recording and victim support, including victim-blaming language, but highlighted recent improvements and extensive training rolled out to officers. Operation Beaconport, a national review of historic cases, aims to address past failures. However, concerns remain about the capacity of the MPS to handle the increasing caseload, particularly with ongoing staff rotation and resource constraints.

Support for Victim Survivors

The committee heard that while London has specialist support services, the demand often outstrips capacity, leading to waiting lists. There is a critical need for long-term, consistent funding for these services, particularly for specialist advocates and trauma-informed support. The importance of a Child First approach, trauma-informed training, and the inclusion of lived experience in police training were emphasized. The MPS is working to improve victim support, including exploring victimless prosecutions and ensuring a trauma-informed approach throughout the criminal justice process.

Partnership Working and Data Sharing

Effective multi-agency working, including with charities and third-sector organisations, was identified as crucial. However, barriers to data sharing due to confidentiality concerns and fragmented systems persist. The MPS is working to improve data collection and sharing, including through new systems and collaboration with national partners like the National Crime Agency (NCA). The development of Multi-Agency Child Protection Teams (MACPTs) is seen as a positive step towards a more coherent and consistent approach across London.

Resourcing and Future Challenges

Concerns were raised about the adequacy of funding for the MPS to tackle grooming gangs and support victims, with the MPS reporting being significantly out of pocket for Operation Beaconport. The ongoing reduction in police numbers and the rotation of specialist officers were highlighted as potential threats to the progress made. The committee also discussed the growing challenge of online exploitation, including the use of AI, and the need for greater responsibility from tech companies and regulators. The importance of a societal response, alongside policing efforts, was repeatedly stressed.

The meeting concluded with a commitment to further scrutiny and follow-up actions, including requests for detailed data on Operation Beaconport, MOPAC's commissioned services, and the MPS's approach to data sharing and training.

London Plan Under Fire: Assembly Debates Housing Targets, Green Belt, and the Future of Urban Development

The London Assembly (Plenary) convened on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected areas, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex interplay between housing development, transport infrastructure, and the need for sustainable, equitable, and accessible solutions for all Londoners. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Galleries and Museums Face Funding Crisis: Committee Debates Visitor Levies and Charging

The Economy, Culture and Skills Committee met on Wednesday, 9 September 2026, to grapple with the precarious financial future of London's beloved museums and galleries. The committee heard stark warnings about reduced public funding, rising costs, and the potential impact of charging admission fees and implementing an overnight visitor levy.

The Squeeze on Culture: A Perfect Storm of Challenges

Museums and galleries across London are facing a perfect storm of financial pressures. Rebecca Pullen, Chief of Staff at the Imperial War Museum (IWM), highlighted a real-terms reduction in grant-in-aid from DCMS, coupled with declining visitor numbers and rising operational costs. This mirrors the experience of independent museums, as explained by Rhiannon Goddard, Chair of Trustees at the Association of Independent Museums (AIM). Many smaller institutions, vital community hubs, are struggling to recover from the pandemic and are hit hard by increased expenses for building maintenance, energy, and staffing. Aaron Pedder, Head of Development at Pitzhanger Manor and Gallery, noted a 50% increase in costs over two years, a burden that rising visitor numbers are failing to offset. Jenny Waldman, Director of the Art Fund, confirmed a significant drop in public funding for culture since 2010, with DCMS core funding down 18% and local government funding for culture down 48%.

Free Entry Under Threat? The Debate on Charging

The principle of free entry to national museums, a cornerstone of cultural access in the UK, is under increasing scrutiny. Sir Tristram Hunt, Director of the V&A, expressed scepticism about charging international visitors, fearing it would reduce visitor numbers and disrupt the museum's established business model, which relies on earned income from exhibitions, retail, and membership. He also noted the practical challenges of identifying and charging international visitors without a digital ID scheme.

Jenny Waldman of the Art Fund strongly defended free entry, calling it a founding principle and emphasizing that national collections belong to all. Polling data suggests strong public support for using revenue from a potential tourist tax to maintain free entry. However, Lord Bailey of Paddington questioned the notion of free entry, reminding the committee that these institutions are taxpayer-funded. He raised concerns about consolidation within the museum sector due to restricted subsidies, prompting a discussion on whether museums should consider even a minuscule fee for long-term survival.

The Overnight Visitor Levy: A Potential Lifeline or Economic Blow?

The proposed overnight visitor levy, a tax on hotel stays, was a major focus. Deputy Mayor for Business and Growth, Howard Dawber OBE, argued that London lags behind other global cities in not having such a levy, seeing it as a vital source of income for the visitor economy. However, Kate Nicholls OBE of UKHospitality strongly opposed the levy, calling it the wrong tax at the wrong time and warning of negative impacts on London's competitiveness. Matthew Fell of BusinessLDN stressed the need for simplicity, transparency, and strict ring-fencing of proceeds for tourism growth.

Concerns were raised about the levy's design, with debates on flat-rate versus percentage charges and the practicalities of collection, particularly from platforms like Airbnb. The potential for funds to be diverted from cultural investment to general council services was a significant worry, though the Deputy Mayor assured that reinvestment in growth and sector support was the intention.

London Stadium's Financial Woes

In a separate but related discussion, the committee heard about the London Stadium's challenging financial position, with projected operating losses. Lynne Garner, Chair of London Stadium LLP, acknowledged the current deal with West Ham United is not financially sustainable and would not be recommended today. The stadium's potential hosting of the 2029 World Athletics Championships is seen as a positive opportunity but faces scheduling conflicts with the football club's season.

The committee's discussions underscore the critical financial pressures facing London's cultural institutions and the complex decisions required to ensure their future sustainability. The potential of the overnight visitor levy offers a glimmer of hope, but its implementation and allocation of funds remain subjects of intense debate.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Galleries and Museums Face Funding Crisis: Committee Debates Visitor Levies and Charging

The Economy, Culture and Skills Committee met on Wednesday, 9 September 2026, to grapple with the precarious financial future of London's beloved museums and galleries. The committee heard stark warnings about reduced public funding, rising costs, and the potential impact of charging admission fees and implementing an overnight visitor levy.

The Squeeze on Culture: A Perfect Storm of Challenges

Museums and galleries across London are facing a perfect storm of financial pressures. Rebecca Pullen, Chief of Staff at the Imperial War Museum (IWM), highlighted a real-terms reduction in grant-in-aid from DCMS, coupled with declining visitor numbers and rising operational costs. This mirrors the experience of independent museums, as explained by Rhiannon Goddard, Chair of Trustees at the Association of Independent Museums (AIM). Many smaller institutions, vital community hubs, are struggling to recover from the pandemic and are hit hard by increased expenses for building maintenance, energy, and staffing. Aaron Pedder, Head of Development at Pitzhanger Manor and Gallery, noted a 50% increase in costs over two years, a burden that rising visitor numbers are failing to offset. Jenny Waldman, Director of the Art Fund, confirmed a significant drop in public funding for culture since 2010, with DCMS core funding down 18% and local government funding for culture down 48%.

Free Entry Under Threat? The Debate on Charging

The principle of free entry to national museums, a cornerstone of cultural access in the UK, is under increasing scrutiny. Sir Tristram Hunt, Director of the V&A, expressed scepticism about charging international visitors, fearing it would reduce visitor numbers and disrupt the museum's established business model, which relies on earned income from exhibitions, retail, and membership. He also noted the practical challenges of identifying and charging international visitors without a digital ID scheme.

Jenny Waldman of the Art Fund strongly defended free entry, calling it a founding principle and emphasizing that national collections belong to all. Polling data suggests strong public support for using revenue from a potential tourist tax to maintain free entry. However, Lord Bailey of Paddington questioned the notion of free entry, reminding the committee that these institutions are taxpayer-funded. He raised concerns about consolidation within the museum sector due to restricted subsidies, prompting a discussion on whether museums should consider even a minuscule fee for long-term survival.

The Overnight Visitor Levy: A Potential Lifeline or Economic Blow?

The proposed overnight visitor levy, a tax on hotel stays, was a major focus. Deputy Mayor for Business and Growth, Howard Dawber OBE, argued that London lags behind other global cities in not having such a levy, seeing it as a vital source of income for the visitor economy. However, Kate Nicholls OBE of UKHospitality strongly opposed the levy, calling it the wrong tax at the wrong time and warning of negative impacts on London's competitiveness. Matthew Fell of BusinessLDN stressed the need for simplicity, transparency, and strict ring-fencing of proceeds for tourism growth.

Concerns were raised about the levy's design, with debates on flat-rate versus percentage charges and the practicalities of collection, particularly from platforms like Airbnb. The potential for funds to be diverted from cultural investment to general council funds was a significant worry, though the Deputy Mayor assured that reinvestment in growth and sector support was the intention.

London Stadium's Financial Woes

In a separate but related discussion, the committee heard about the London Stadium's challenging financial position, with projected operating losses. Lynne Garner, Chair of London Stadium LLP, acknowledged the current deal with West Ham United Football Club is not financially sustainable and would not be recommended today. The stadium's potential hosting of the 2029 World Athletics Championships was seen as a fantastic opportunity but faces a significant hurdle: the conflict between UK Athletics' preferred September timing and West Ham's football season. The contract's overriding priority principle gives the club veto power over such events during their season, a point of contention that requires careful negotiation with the club's new leadership.

The committee's discussions on both the Overnight Visitor Levy and the London Stadium highlight the complex financial realities and strategic decisions facing the Greater London Authority as it navigates economic challenges and seeks to support London's cultural and sporting future.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Galleries and Museums Face Funding Crisis: Committee Debates Visitor Levies and Charging

The Economy, Culture and Skills Committee met on Wednesday, 9 September 2026, to grapple with the precarious financial future of London's beloved museums and galleries. The committee heard stark warnings about reduced public funding, rising costs, and the potential impact of charging admission fees and implementing an overnight visitor levy.

The Squeeze on Culture: A Perfect Storm of Challenges

Museums and galleries across London are facing a perfect storm of financial pressures. Rebecca Pullen, Chief of Staff at the Imperial War Museum (IWM), highlighted a real-terms reduction in grant-in-aid from DCMS, coupled with declining visitor numbers and rising operational costs. This mirrors the experience of independent museums, as explained by Rhiannon Goddard, Chair of Trustees at the Association of Independent Museums (AIM). Many smaller institutions, vital community hubs, are struggling to recover from the pandemic and are hit hard by increased expenses for building maintenance, energy, and staffing. Aaron Pedder, Head of Development at Pitzhanger Manor and Gallery, noted a 50% increase in costs over two years, a burden that rising visitor numbers are failing to offset. Jenny Waldman, Director of the Art Fund, confirmed a significant drop in public funding for culture since 2010, with DCMS core funding down 18% and local government funding for culture down 48%.

Free Entry Under Threat? The Debate on Charging

The principle of free entry to national museums, a cornerstone of cultural access in the UK, is under increasing scrutiny. Sir Tristram Hunt, Director of the V&A, expressed scepticism about charging international visitors, fearing it would reduce visitor numbers and disrupt the museum's established business model, which relies on earned income from exhibitions, retail, and membership. He also noted the practical challenges of identifying and charging international visitors without a digital ID scheme.

Jenny Waldman of the Art Fund strongly defended free entry, calling it a founding principle and emphasizing that national collections belong to all. Polling data suggests strong public support for using revenue from a potential tourist tax to maintain free entry. However, Lord Bailey of Paddington questioned the notion of free entry, reminding the committee that these institutions are taxpayer-funded. He raised concerns about consolidation within the museum sector due to restricted subsidies, prompting a discussion on whether museums should consider even a minuscule fee for long-term survival.

The Overnight Visitor Levy: A Potential Lifeline or Economic Blow?

The proposed overnight visitor levy, a tax on hotel stays, was a major focus. Deputy Mayor for Business and Growth, Howard Dawber OBE, argued that London lags behind other global cities in not having such a levy, seeing it as a vital source of income for the visitor economy. However, Kate Nicholls OBE of UKHospitality strongly opposed the levy, calling it the wrong tax at the wrong time and warning of negative impacts on London's competitiveness. Matthew Fell of BusinessLDN stressed the need for simplicity, transparency, and strict ring-fencing of proceeds for tourism growth.

Concerns were raised about the levy's design, with debates on flat-rate versus percentage charges and the practicalities of collection, particularly from platforms like Airbnb. The potential for funds to be diverted from cultural investment to general council funds was a significant worry, though the Deputy Mayor assured that reinvestment in growth and sector support was the intention.

London Stadium's Financial Woes

In a separate but related discussion, the committee heard about the London Stadium's challenging financial position, with projected operating losses. Lynne Garner, Chair of London Stadium LLP, acknowledged the current deal with West Ham United Football Club is not financially sustainable and would not be recommended today. The stadium's potential hosting of the 2029 World Athletics Championships was seen as a fantastic opportunity but faces a significant hurdle: the conflict between UK Athletics' preferred September timing and West Ham's football season. The contract's overriding priority principle gives the club veto power over such events during their season, a point of contention that requires careful negotiation with the club's new leadership.

The committee's discussions on both the Overnight Visitor Levy and the London Stadium highlight the complex financial realities and strategic decisions facing the Greater London Authority as it navigates economic challenges and seeks to support London's cultural and sporting future.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

Grooming Gangs: Harrowing Testimonies Expose Deep-Rooted Failures in Protecting London's Children

The Police and Crime Committee met on Wednesday, 9 September 2026, to confront the devastating reality of grooming gangs operating in London. Experts shared harrowing accounts of child sexual exploitation, detailing how these criminal networks prey on the most vulnerable. The committee heard that despite increased attention, the true scale of the problem remains unknown due to fragmented data and systemic failures. The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) acknowledged past shortcomings in its response to child sexual exploitation, including historical issues with data recording and victim support.

The Hidden Scale of the Problem

The committee heard that the term grooming gangs is widely understood by the public but is not a precise legal or operational term used by the MPS. Experts suggested focusing on the harms experienced by victims and the group-based nature of the offending, rather than a specific label, to ensure no one falls through the cracks. The MPS acknowledged that while they do not underestimate the scale of the problem, the hidden nature of exploitation, particularly online, means the true extent is difficult to ascertain. They are actively working to improve data collection, including ethnicity data, and are committed to a Child First approach in their investigations.

Challenges in Identification and Investigation

A significant challenge identified was the difficulty in identifying perpetrators and victims due to fragmented data systems and a lack of consistent definitions across agencies. The MPS acknowledged historical shortcomings in data recording and victim support, including victim-blaming language, but highlighted recent improvements and extensive training rolled out to officers. Operation Beaconport, a national review of historic cases, aims to address past failures. However, concerns remain about the capacity of the MPS to handle the increasing caseload, particularly with ongoing staff rotation and resource constraints.

Support for Victim Survivors

The committee heard that while London has specialist support services, the demand often outstrips capacity, leading to waiting lists. There is a critical need for long-term, consistent funding for these services, particularly for specialist advocates and trauma-informed support. The importance of a Child First approach, trauma-informed training, and the inclusion of lived experience in police training were emphasized. The MPS is working to improve victim support, including exploring victimless prosecutions and ensuring a trauma-informed approach throughout the criminal justice process.

Partnership Working and Data Sharing

Effective multi-agency working, including with charities and third-sector organisations, was identified as crucial. However, barriers to data sharing due to confidentiality concerns and fragmented systems persist. The MPS is working to improve data collection and sharing, including through new systems and collaboration with national partners like the National Crime Agency (NCA). The development of Multi-Agency Child Protection Teams (MACPTs) is seen as a positive step towards a more coherent and consistent approach across London.

Resourcing and Future Challenges

Concerns were raised about the adequacy of funding for the MPS to tackle grooming gangs and support victims, with the MPS reporting being significantly out of pocket for Operation Beaconport. The ongoing reduction in police numbers and the rotation of specialist officers were highlighted as potential threats to the progress made. The committee also discussed the growing challenge of online exploitation, including the use of AI, and the need for greater responsibility from tech companies and regulators. The importance of a societal response, alongside policing efforts, was repeatedly stressed.

The meeting concluded with a commitment to further scrutiny and follow-up actions, including requests for detailed data on Operation Beaconport, MOPAC's commissioned services, and the MPS's approach to data sharing and training.

London Plan Under Fire: Assembly Debates Housing Targets, Green Belt, and the Future of Urban Development

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Housing Crisis: Draft Plan Under Fire for Deliverability and Green Belt Concerns

The London Assembly (Plenary) met on Thursday, 10 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan, a pivotal document shaping the capital's future development. Assembly Members raised significant concerns about the plan's ability to deliver affordable housing, its approach to Green Belt land, and its overall impact on Londoners.

Housing Crisis: Ambitious Targets, Uncertain Delivery

The draft London Plan aims to deliver 558,000 homes over ten years, with a focus on optimising brownfield land and promoting mid-rise development. However, Assembly Members questioned the plan's deliverability, particularly in light of current economic challenges and the historical underperformance of housing targets. Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, Tom Copley, acknowledged that achieving the target is theoretically plausible but dependent on economic upturns, sustained investment in transport, and increased affordable housing grant.

Concerns were raised about the proposed thresholds for affordable housing (35%, 25%, and 20%), with questions about the methodology behind borough-specific allocations. Deputy Mayor for Planning and Regeneration, Jules Pipe CBE, explained that these thresholds are designed to incentivise developers and are based on viability assessments, factoring in average sales values and future economic projections. However, Assembly Members expressed skepticism, highlighting the significant profits of major developers while Londoners struggle with unaffordable housing.

Green Belt Under Pressure: A Balancing Act?

The plan's proposal for targeted Green Belt release, amounting to 10% of new housing delivery, sparked heated debate. While Deputy Mayor Pipe assured that 90% of delivery would be on brownfield land and that Green Belt release would be landscape-led with strict biodiversity requirements, Assembly Members questioned the fairness of the distribution and the potential impact on local communities. The removal of a dedicated fire safety policy from the draft plan also drew criticism, with fears that developers could weaken policies during viability negotiations.

Climate Resilience and Community Concerns

The draft plan's approach to climate resilience, extreme heat, and flooding was also scrutinised. Deputy Mayor Pipe outlined a multi-layered strategy, but Assembly Member Caroline Russell questioned the effectiveness of current policies in addressing the urban heat island effect and increasing canopy cover. Concerns were also raised about the dwindling burial space in London, particularly for specific faith communities, and the lack of a London-wide strategy.

The Assembly debated and passed several motions, including one calling for the long-term future of Notting Hill Carnival in its current location, and another condemning the use of Palantir technology by public services due to ethical concerns. A motion condemning planning reforms that reduce local councillor influence and delegate decisions to officers also passed, reflecting a broader unease about democratic accountability in the planning process.

The discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan is now open for consultation, and further debate is expected as the Assembly and Londoners scrutinise its proposals.

Transport Committee: SAM Metric Under Fire, Industrial Land Safeguarding and Car Club Concerns

The Transport Committee met on Tuesday, 8 September 2026, to scrutinise the draft London Plan's approach to transport infrastructure, industrial land, and car clubs. The new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) faced significant criticism for its perceived limitations, while the safeguarding of industrial land and the promotion of car clubs also generated debate.

Sustainable Access Measure (SAM): A Flawed Metric?

The Sustainable Access Measure (SAM), designed to guide housing density towards well-connected locations, was a focal point of discussion. Assembly Members raised concerns that SAM does not adequately account for transport capacity, crowding, or the specific needs of disabled Londoners. The exclusion of cycling as a primary travel option in the metric was particularly criticised, given its significant modal share in inner London.

TfL representatives acknowledged that SAM is a technical tool and that further work is needed to refine its metrics, particularly regarding accessibility and the inclusion of cycling. While SAM aims to be a more appropriate measure than the previous PTAL, questions remain about its ability to ensure equitable transport access and prevent overcrowding in densely populated areas. The committee stressed the need for TfL to engage more deeply with disability organisations and to develop clearer timelines for incorporating accessibility enhancements.

Industrial Land Safeguarding: Balancing Needs

The draft London Plan's approach to safeguarding industrial land was discussed, with a recognition of its crucial role in London's economy and freight distribution. The plan aims to protect the majority of industrial land while allowing for targeted release in well-connected areas suitable for housing. However, concerns were raised about the potential impact on logistics and freight movement, particularly in outer London boroughs. TfL acknowledged the need to protect rail and river freight connections and to ensure that any industrial land release does not undermine essential servicing and delivery networks.

Car Clubs and Sustainable Travel: A Missed Opportunity?

The role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel was also debated. While the draft plan supports car club provision, the preference for on-street spaces over provision within new developments drew criticism. Assembly Members argued that this could limit accessibility and undermine the goal of reducing private car ownership. TfL acknowledged the importance of car clubs and committed to considering feedback on the on-street provision preference. The committee also discussed the need for more robust policies to support car clubs as a viable alternative to private car ownership, particularly in new developments.

The committee's discussions highlighted the complex challenges facing London's development, balancing housing needs with environmental concerns, community impact, and economic realities. The draft London Plan's approach to these issues is under scrutiny, with a clear call for greater detail, transparency, and a more inclusive consideration of diverse travel needs.

Upcoming Meetings

  • Housing Committee: Thursday 24 September 2026, 00:00. Topics include the committee's

GLA budget: promotion vs. public info?

This week in Greater London Authority:

GLA Communications Under Fire: Are Taxpayer Funds Being Used for Promotion or Public Information?

The GLA Oversight Committee met on Wednesday, 2 September 2026, to dissect the purpose and effectiveness of the Greater London Authority's public communications. The meeting, which featured a robust discussion with the Mayor's Chief of Staff, David Bellamy, and other senior GLA officials, revealed significant tensions over whether the GLA's £1.35 million marketing budget is primarily used for informing Londoners or promoting the Mayor's achievements.

The Four Objectives of GLA Communications

Nicole Valentinuzzi, Director of External Relations for the GLA, outlined the four core objectives of GLA communications:

  • To help Londoners understand available services.
  • To increase uptake of support and opportunities.
  • To encourage positive behaviours and improve outcomes.
  • To ensure democratic accountability by demonstrating the use of public money.

Valentinuzzi highlighted historical successes, such as connecting over 61,000 people with homelessness support and 1.3 million Londoners with Brexit advice. More recently, campaigns on rental rights have reached over 1.7 million people, driving 35,000 users to the rogue landlord checker. A campaign to tackle misogyny and violence against women and girls reportedly showed favourable behaviour change, with 85% of those who saw it stating they would call out misogynistic behaviour. The Mayor's social media following has grown to 7 million, with engagement tripling since 2020.

Questioning the Metrics: How Do We Know It's Working?

Assembly Members pressed for clarity on how these figures are measured. The 61,000 referrals for rough sleeping support, for instance, were attributed to direct referrals from campaigns via tracking links. However, the 1.3 million figure for Brexit support was described as overall visits to a hub, driven by a mix of paid advertising, organic social media, and posters, making direct attribution to specific advertisements less precise.

A central point of contention was the definition of accountability communications. Critics argued that this category often appeared to be mere promotion of the Mayor's policies and achievements, rather than genuine accountability for failures or negative outcomes. When questioned why adverts never highlighted funding cuts, missed targets, or crime rises, officials stated that the Assembly's role was to hold the Mayor accountable, and that the GLA budget funds the Mayor's work. The committee explored whether the Assembly could use these channels to hold the Mayor accountable, with the Deputy Mayor confirming that the Assembly has its own budget and can decide how to use it for communications.

The £1.35 Million Marketing Budget: Allocation and Safeguards

The £1.35 million central marketing budget is broken down into fees, licenses, research, production, and media spend, rather than by campaign objective (information, behaviour change, accountability). This lack of specific allocation for accountability campaigns drew criticism, with concerns that the focus might be too heavily on promoting the Mayor.

Safeguards are in place, with all communications undergoing legal analysis and checks by the Advertising Standards Authority. A poster campaign solely featuring the Mayor's image without substance would not be approved. However, the timing of campaigns, particularly in the run-up to elections, was questioned, with assurances that the GLA Use of Resources policy and the Code of Practice on Local Authority Publicity govern these periods.

The Assembly's Role and the Mayor's Budget

A recurring theme was the allocation of TfL advertising space. While deemed non-commercial by TfL and Global/JCDecaux, Assembly Members questioned its actual commercial value and transparency in allocation. The GLA Mayor's budget funds this activity, and it was clarified that this budget is separate from the London Assembly's communications budget. The GLA Act allows the Mayor greater scope for publicity due to the powers afforded to his office, but it does not grant exclusive control over this asset.

Tackling Fraud in the GLA Group: A Proactive Approach

In a separate but crucial discussion, the GLA Oversight Committee also heard from Richard Mullings, Head of Counter Fraud and Corruption for TfL, and Paul Brumage, Senior Fraud and Corruption Investigation Manager for TfL. They detailed TfL's robust counter-fraud measures, including an anti-fraud and corruption policy and a plan to 2030 with pillars of prevent, detect, and pursue.

TfL investigates allegations against employees, contractors, suppliers, customers, and organised criminals, pursuing recovery of losses and identifying control weaknesses. They collaborate with other GLA group partners and external agencies like law enforcement to share intelligence and best practices.

Key fraud risks identified include procurement fraud (ghost services, timesheet fraud, invoicing for uncompleted works), theft of personal data, pay and benefits fraud, external fraud targeting concessionary Oyster cards, cyber-enabled fraud (payment diversion), and fraud within recruitment processes. The committee heard that remote and hybrid working has created new risks, necessitating stronger management oversight.

TfL has implemented an e-learning course on countering fraud and corruption, mandatory for all employees. They also conduct fraud awareness weeks and provide bespoke training for high-risk areas. The committee was assured that significant changes have been made to data access controls following a 2021 HR employee data theft case, with access now restricted to a very small number of individuals and an audit trail in place.

The committee also discussed the introduction of a granular fraud and corruption risk assessment process at TfL, which could be mirrored across the GLA family. This process aims to identify fraud risks and mitigations at a detailed business area level. TfL also highlighted the importance of data-driven reporting for auditing by exception and more frequent communications on policies and procedures to strengthen fraud prevention.

For Londoners, these discussions highlight the GLA's commitment to transparency and accountability in its communications and financial management, while also underscoring the ongoing efforts to combat fraud across the group, protecting public funds and services.

London Visitor Levy Debate & Stadium Finances

This week in Greater London Authority:

London's Visitor Levy: A Bold Move or a Tax Too Far?

The Economy, Culture and Skills Committee met on Monday, 20 July 2026, to debate a potential new charge for overnight stays in London, known as the Overnight Visitor Levy. This proposal, which could see visitors pay an additional fee on top of their accommodation costs, has sparked intense debate, with significant implications for London's vital tourism sector and its competitiveness on the global stage.

The core of the discussion revolved around whether such a levy would be a necessary tool for generating revenue to boost London's visitor economy or an unwelcome tax that could deter tourists and harm businesses already facing economic pressures.

The Case for the Levy: Funding Growth and Fiscal Devolution

Proponents, including Deputy Mayor for Business Growth, Howard Dawber OBE, argue that London is an outlier among major global cities for not having such a levy. They see it as a crucial step towards fiscal devolution, allowing London to generate its own income to invest back into the city's growth and visitor experience. Anthony Breach, Director of Policy and Research at the Centre for Cities, strongly advocated for this, stating that London is fiscally centralised compared to other G7 nations. He believes a visitor levy is a vital first step in demonstrating that cities can be trusted with their own tax bases to fund local services and growth. The potential revenue could be used to enhance attractions, support cultural events, and improve infrastructure, ultimately benefiting both visitors and residents.

The Opposition: A Tax at the Wrong Time?

However, powerful voices from the hospitality sector expressed strong opposition. Kate Nicholls OBE, Chair of UKHospitality, declared it the wrong tax at the wrong time, arguing that the current economic climate is particularly challenging for businesses already burdened by increased taxes and operating costs. She warned that any additional charge would inevitably be passed on to consumers, impacting London's competitiveness and potentially leading to job losses. Matthew Fell, Director of Competitiveness at BusinessLDN, echoed these concerns, emphasizing that international comparisons of cities with similar levies often overlook the higher tax base and operating costs faced by UK businesses. He stressed the need for simplicity, transparency, and a clear ring-fencing of any proceeds for tourism growth.

Key Concerns and Potential Impacts:

  • Competitiveness: Critics argue that adding another cost to visiting London could make it less attractive compared to other global cities, especially when combined with existing high VAT rates and business taxes. Research cited suggested a potential £2 billion hit to GDP and the loss of 28,000 jobs nationally if a levy were introduced.
  • Impact on Different Visitors: While often framed as a tax on international tourists, the levy could affect domestic visitors, those visiting family and friends, and business travellers, potentially impacting spending in wider sectors like retail and hospitality.
  • Levy Design: A significant debate centred on whether the levy should be a flat rate or a percentage of the accommodation cost. Proponents of a percentage rate argued it is more progressive, while opponents favoured a flat rate for simplicity and ease of administration for businesses.
  • Ring-fencing of Funds: A crucial point of discussion was ensuring that any revenue generated is directly reinvested into tourism and visitor experience, rather than being absorbed into general council funds. Businesses stressed the importance of this for their support.
  • Implementation Challenges: Questions were raised about how the levy would be collected from platforms like Airbnb and whether these platforms should be responsible for collection. The need for a national framework and clear registration schemes was highlighted.

The London Stadium's Financial Tightrope

In a separate but significant discussion, the committee also examined the precarious financial situation of the London Stadium. Lynne Garner, Chair of London Stadium LLP, painted a challenging picture, with projections indicating an annual operating loss of around £1.8 million, potentially rising to £2.5 million. This is despite efforts to improve commercial deals and drive efficiencies.

Garner was unequivocal in her assessment of the current deal with West Ham United Football Club, stating she would absolutely not recommend signing it now, highlighting its favourable terms for the club. The relegation of West Ham from the Premier League adds further financial pressure, though the projected loss remains substantial.

Discussions also touched upon the stadium's naming rights, which are split between the club and the operator, complicating any sale. Garner expressed pessimism about securing a deal quickly due to historical bargaining and the club's current league status.

The potential hosting of the 2029 World Athletics Championships was seen as a fantastic opportunity but faces a significant hurdle: the conflict between UK Athletics' preferred September timing and West Ham's football season. The contract's overriding priority principle gives the club veto power over such events during their season, a point of contention that requires careful negotiation with the club's new leadership.

The committee's discussions on both the Overnight Visitor Levy and the London Stadium highlight the complex financial realities and strategic decisions facing the Greater London Authority as it navigates economic challenges and seeks to support London's cultural and sporting future.

London Council: Fly-tipping, AVs & Child Exploitation

This week in Greater London Authority:

Fly-Tipping Crisis: London's Environment Committee Tackles Rising Tide of Illegal Dumping

London's battle against fly-tipping is intensifying, with the Environment Committee meeting on Wednesday, 15 July 2026, to confront a problem that has seen incidents rise by nearly 50% since 2018-19. While experts suggest improved reporting may be a factor, the environmental and social costs are undeniable. Fly-tipped waste pollutes waterways, harms wildlife, and blights communities, contributing to feelings of anger and embarrassment.

The committee heard from organisations like Keep Britain Tidy and Harrow Litterpickers, who highlighted that while national figures are rising, local data collection methods vary, making precise measurement difficult. Inner London boroughs consistently show higher rates, attributed to higher population density and older properties not designed for modern waste management.

Poverty and deprivation are intrinsically linked to fly-tipping. Lack of resources for bulky waste collection, limited transport for disposal, and inadequate bin provision in rented accommodation all contribute. Language barriers and digital exclusion can also prevent residents from accessing vital information.

Practical solutions were explored, including community skips and free bulky waste collection services, with Richmond Council's community skip programme cited as a highly popular success. Harrow Litterpickers highlighted their borough's free bulky waste collection and drop-and-go services, which engage residents and raise awareness.

The debate around CCTV and naming and shaming revealed a mixed response. While acknowledged as a deterrent, fly-tippers can simply move to unmonitored locations. Consistent enforcement throughout the year, not just before elections, was stressed as essential.

Organised crime is a significant driver, with an estimated 35% of large-scale dumping attributed to criminal gangs seeking quick profits. The Environment Agency faces challenges in prosecuting these groups due to low perceived risk and weak penalties. The committee also discussed the environmental impacts, including soil contamination, waterway pollution, and localised fires caused by decomposing waste.

A key takeaway was the urgent need for better coordination and information sharing between boroughs, the Environment Agency, and other enforcement bodies. Volunteer-led evidence gathering models, like the one in Harrow, were praised for extending enforcement reach through local intelligence. While the government's Waste Crime Action Plan and additional funding are welcomed, concerns remain about the speed of legislative changes and the resources needed to tackle organised waste crime effectively. Prevention, alongside enforcement, is crucial, with a call for greater public awareness of the duty of care when disposing of waste.

Autonomous Vehicles: London's Transport Future Hangs in the Balance as Safety and Equity Concerns Dominate

London's transport landscape is on the cusp of a revolution with the potential introduction of autonomous passenger vehicles (APVs). However, the Transport Committee's meeting on Tuesday, 14 July 2026, revealed that this future is far from certain, with significant concerns surrounding safety, regulatory frameworks, and the equitable integration of this technology. Transport for London (TfL) officials, Christina Calderado and Danny Price, presented a cautious outlook, emphasizing the need for a robust, London-centric approach.

TfL's role as a consenting authority for APV services is critical, but their limited ongoing influence once consent is granted is a major point of contention. TfL is advocating for licensing powers to be returned to them, arguing that managing APVs alongside other transport modes is essential for integrated planning. Their proposed 2025 framework, while a starting point, will evolve as more comprehensive guidance for services on London's streets is developed. TfL is not rushing to publish this guidance, conscious of the interest and the need for thoroughness, but anticipates being ready to process applications by September or October, pending DVSA processes.

A central concern is the potential for APVs to exacerbate congestion, making buses less efficient and deterring passengers, disproportionately affecting lower-income Londoners. TfL is considering measures like geographical operating areas and fleet sizes, and advocating for short initial permit durations to allow for oversight and intervention. The distinction between fully autonomous services and those with safety drivers was clarified, with applications for the latter following existing licensing routes.

Assembly Member Hina Bokhari OBE highlighted the lack of data sharing from current AV trials, a concern TfL shares. Data sharing will be a core requirement for future consent. The impact on taxi and private hire jobs was acknowledged, with TfL believing there will always be a place for driver-led services, particularly for luggage and accessibility needs. However, the potential workforce impact requires a government-level conversation.

TfL's stance on road danger reduction is clear: APVs must meet a Vision Zero standard of safety, exceeding the government's careful and competent driver benchmark. They seek more stringent requirements, including the power to suspend operations if safety issues arise – a power they currently lack. Concerns about APVs obstructing cycle lanes, interfering with emergency services, and impacting passenger drop-off locations will be addressed in TfL's guidance.

Accessibility for disabled Londoners is a major focus. TfL plans to set clear accessibility requirements, including provisions for wheelchair users, assistance dogs, and accessible booking channels, and will require operators to demonstrate engagement with accessibility groups. Passenger safeguarding is also paramount, with expectations for robust measures, including immediate voice contact with UK-based, DBS-checked support centres, and protocols to manage harassment or criminal activity. TfL is considering a minimum age of 18 for unaccompanied travel during pilot phases.

The economic impact of APVs remains debated, with skepticism about government figures on job creation. TfL believes true economic benefits will stem from improved connectivity, especially in outer London. The committee's discussions underscore the need for a phased introduction of APVs and support for affected workers.

Grooming Gangs: Met Police Acknowledge Past Failures, Vow to Rebuild Trust with Survivors

The Police and Crime Committee met on Wednesday, 15 July 2026, to address the persistent and deeply concerning issue of grooming gangs in London. Deputy Assistant Commissioner Kevin Southworth of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) acknowledged past failings in handling child sexual exploitation cases, admitting that a societal paradigm that placed undue value judgment on victims' lifestyles contributed to higher no further action rates. He apologised for these past shortcomings, emphasizing a significant cultural shift within the MPS since 2022.

Operation Beaconport, a national review of historic cases, is underway to identify past safeguarding failures and reinvestigate cases where justice may not have been served. Southworth stated that approximately 12,000 offences are being reviewed, encompassing intra-familial abuse, peer-on-peer abuse, institutional abuse, and child sexual exploitation involving an asymmetry of power. While the MPS is not fully resourced for this extensive work, efforts are being made to maintain numbers in critical areas.

The committee heard that the MPS prefers the term organised group-based child sexual exploitation over grooming gangs for precision, though they acknowledge the public's understanding of the latter. Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime, Kaya Comer-Schwartz, stated that while all forms of child sexual abuse are abhorrent, London has not seen the specific pattern of grooming gangs seen in places like Rochdale and Rotherham, though cases closest to the public's understanding do exist. This statement was met with skepticism by Assembly Member Emma Best, who felt the Deputy Mayor was not directly answering whether the Mayor's previous statement that such gangs did not exist in London was incorrect.

The MPS is improving its data flagging system, aiming for near 100% accuracy, and is working with the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to increase charging rates for sexual offences. The committee also heard about MOPAC's victim support services, including The Lighthouse, a centre of expertise for child sexual abuse, which is being rolled out nationally. MOPAC is increasing the capacity of these services by 20% with additional funding related to Operation Beaconport.

The discussion highlighted the vital role of Multi-Agency Child Exploitation (MACE) meetings, with efforts underway to ensure consistency across London. The Child First strategy, developed with young people and experts, aims to be trauma-informed and victim-centred. For survivors, the message is clear: the MPS is committed to rebuilding trust and encouraging reporting, emphasizing that it is never too late to come forward.

Mayor's Question Time: Housing, Transport, and the Cost of Living Dominate Assembly Agenda

Mayor Sadiq Khan faced a barrage of questions from Assembly Members during Mayor's Question Time on Thursday, 16 July 2026. Key issues dominating the session included the new draft London Plan, the persistent problem of tube noise, the Mayor's transparency regarding his diary, and the use of policing technology.

The Mayor announced the publication of the new draft London Plan, a strategy focused on good growth to increase affordable housing and boost economic development, particularly in future industries like AI and life sciences. He acknowledged the current challenges facing house-building, including high interest rates and rising construction costs, but expressed optimism that the plan would provide a framework for recovery.

Assembly Member Elly Baker raised concerns about the ongoing issue of tube noise and vibration, questioning TfL's progress and transparency. The Mayor committed to ensuring TfL provides more detailed information on rail grinding activities, track renewal programmes, and noise complaints by constituency.

Transparency was a central theme, with Assembly Member Lord Bailey of Paddington repeatedly pressing the Mayor on the delayed publication of his diary. While the Mayor asserted he is the most transparent mayor, the lack of publication for two years led to accusations of hypocrisy. The Mayor apologised for the delay and promised to investigate the reasons for the hold-up.

The use of policing technology, including live facial recognition (LFR) and artificial intelligence (AI), was also discussed. The Mayor highlighted LFR's contribution to over 2,000 arrests and its planned rollout in central London. He assured the Assembly that robust oversight and ethical scrutiny are in place.

Assembly Members also debated the Mayor's approach to housing delivery, with concerns raised about the proposed reduction in affordable housing targets for fast-track planning routes. The Mayor defended these as temporary measures to address market difficulties. The issue of pensions for elected members was resolved with the approval of access to the Local Government Pension Scheme.

For Londoners, these discussions highlight the ongoing efforts to address housing shortages, improve transport, and ensure public services are delivered effectively and transparently. The Assembly's scrutiny of the Mayor's actions remains a vital part of holding him accountable for the future of the capital.

Upcoming Meetings

This week in Greater London Authority:

Fly-Tipping Crisis: London's Environment Committee Tackles Rising Tide of Illegal Dumping

London's battle against fly-tipping is intensifying, with the Environment Committee meeting on Wednesday, 15 July 2026, to confront a problem that has seen incidents rise by nearly 50% since 2018-19. While experts suggest improved reporting may be a factor, the environmental and social costs are undeniable. Fly-tipped waste pollutes waterways, harms wildlife, and blights communities, contributing to feelings of anger and embarrassment.

The committee heard from organisations like Keep Britain Tidy and Harrow Litterpickers, who highlighted that while national figures are rising, local data collection methods vary, making precise measurement difficult. Inner London boroughs consistently show higher rates, attributed to higher population density and older properties not designed for modern waste management.

Poverty and deprivation are intrinsically linked to fly-tipping. Lack of resources for bulky waste collection, limited transport for disposal, and inadequate bin provision in rented accommodation all contribute. Language barriers and digital exclusion can also prevent residents from accessing vital information.

Practical solutions were explored, including community skips and free bulky waste collection services, with Richmond Council's community skip programme cited as a highly popular success. Harrow Litterpickers highlighted their borough's free bulky waste collection and drop-and-go services, which engage residents and raise awareness.

The debate around CCTV and naming and shaming revealed a mixed response. While acknowledged as a deterrent, fly-tippers can simply move to unmonitored locations. Consistent enforcement throughout the year, not just before elections, was stressed as essential.

Organised crime is a significant driver, with an estimated 35% of large-scale dumping attributed to criminal gangs seeking quick profits. The Environment Agency faces challenges in prosecuting these groups due to low perceived risk and weak penalties. The committee also discussed the environmental impacts, including soil contamination, waterway pollution, and localised fires caused by decomposing waste.

A key takeaway was the urgent need for better coordination and information sharing between boroughs, the Environment Agency, and other enforcement bodies. Volunteer-led evidence gathering models, like the one in Harrow, were praised for extending enforcement reach through local intelligence. While the government's Waste Crime Action Plan and additional funding are welcomed, concerns remain about the speed of legislative changes and the resources needed to tackle organised waste crime effectively. Prevention, alongside enforcement, is crucial, with a call for greater public awareness of the duty of care when disposing of waste.

Autonomous Vehicles: London's Transport Future Hangs in the Balance as Safety and Equity Concerns Dominate

London's transport landscape is on the cusp of a revolution with the potential introduction of autonomous passenger vehicles (APVs). However, the Transport Committee's meeting on Tuesday, 14 July 2026, revealed that this future is far from certain, with significant concerns surrounding safety, regulatory frameworks, and the equitable integration of this technology. Transport for London (TfL) officials, Christina Calderado and Danny Price, presented a cautious outlook, emphasizing the need for a robust, London-centric approach.

TfL's role as a consenting authority for APV services is critical, but their limited ongoing influence once consent is granted is a major point of contention. TfL is advocating for licensing powers to be returned to them, arguing that managing APVs alongside other transport modes is essential for integrated planning. Their proposed 2025 framework, while a starting point, will evolve as more comprehensive guidance for services on London's streets is developed. TfL is not rushing to publish this guidance, conscious of the interest and the need for thoroughness, but anticipates being ready to process applications by September or October, pending DVSA processes.

A central concern is the potential for APVs to exacerbate congestion, making buses less efficient and deterring passengers, disproportionately affecting lower-income Londoners. TfL is considering measures like geographical operating areas and fleet sizes, and advocating for short initial permit durations to allow for oversight and intervention. The distinction between fully autonomous services and those with safety drivers was clarified, with applications for the latter following existing licensing routes.

Assembly Member Hina Bokhari OBE highlighted the lack of data sharing from current AV trials, a concern TfL shares. Data sharing will be a core requirement for future consent. The impact on taxi and private hire jobs was acknowledged, with TfL believing there will always be a place for driver-led services, particularly for luggage and accessibility needs. However, the potential workforce impact requires a government-level conversation.

TfL's stance on road danger reduction is clear: APVs must meet a Vision Zero standard of safety, exceeding the government's careful and competent driver benchmark. They seek more stringent requirements, including the power to suspend operations if safety issues arise – a power they currently lack. Concerns about APVs obstructing cycle lanes, interfering with emergency services, and impacting passenger drop-off locations will be addressed in TfL's guidance.

Accessibility for disabled Londoners is a major focus. TfL plans to set clear accessibility requirements, including provisions for wheelchair users, assistance dogs, and accessible booking channels, and will require operators to demonstrate engagement with accessibility groups. Passenger safeguarding is also paramount, with expectations for robust measures, including immediate voice contact with UK-based, DBS-checked support centres, and protocols to manage harassment or criminal activity. TfL is considering a minimum age of 18 for unaccompanied travel during pilot phases.

The economic impact of APVs remains debated, with skepticism about government figures on job creation. TfL believes true economic benefits will stem from improved connectivity, especially in outer London. The committee's discussions underscore the need for a phased introduction of APVs and support for affected workers.

Grooming Gangs: Met Police Acknowledge Past Failures, Vow to Rebuild Trust with Survivors

The Police and Crime Committee met on Wednesday, 15 July 2026, to address the persistent and deeply concerning issue of grooming gangs in London. Deputy Assistant Commissioner Kevin Southworth of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) acknowledged past failings in handling child sexual exploitation cases, admitting that a societal paradigm that placed undue value judgment on victims' lifestyles contributed to higher no further action rates. He apologised for these past shortcomings, emphasizing a significant cultural shift within the MPS since 2022.

Operation Beaconport, a national review of historic cases, is underway to identify past safeguarding failures and reinvestigate cases where justice may not have been served. Southworth stated that approximately 12,000 offences are being reviewed, encompassing intra-familial abuse, peer-on-peer abuse, institutional abuse, and child sexual exploitation involving an asymmetry of power. While the MPS is not fully resourced for this extensive work, efforts are being made to maintain numbers in critical areas.

The committee heard that the MPS prefers the term organised group-based child sexual exploitation over grooming gangs for precision, though they acknowledge the public's understanding of the latter. Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime, Kaya Comer-Schwartz, stated that while all forms of child sexual abuse are abhorrent, London has not seen the specific pattern of grooming gangs seen in places like Rochdale and Rotherham, though cases closest to the public's understanding do exist. This statement was met with skepticism by Assembly Member Emma Best, who felt the Deputy Mayor was not directly answering whether the Mayor's previous statement that such gangs did not exist in London was incorrect.

The MPS is improving its data flagging system, aiming for near 100% accuracy, and is working with the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to increase charging rates for sexual offences. The committee also heard about MOPAC's victim support services, including The Lighthouse, a centre of expertise for child sexual abuse, which is being rolled out nationally. MOPAC is increasing the capacity of these services by 20% with additional funding related to Operation Beaconport.

The discussion highlighted the vital role of Multi-Agency Child Exploitation (MACE) meetings, with efforts underway to ensure consistency across London. The Child First strategy, developed with young people and experts, aims to be trauma-informed and victim-centred. For survivors, the message is clear: the MPS is committed to rebuilding trust and encouraging reporting, emphasizing that it is never too late to come forward.

Mayor's Question Time: Housing, Transport, and the Cost of Living Dominate Assembly Agenda

Mayor Sadiq Khan faced a barrage of questions from Assembly Members during Mayor's Question Time on Thursday, 16 July 2026. Key issues dominating the session included the new draft London Plan, the persistent problem of tube noise, the Mayor's transparency regarding his diary, and the use of policing technology.

The Mayor announced the publication of the new draft London Plan, a strategy focused on good growth to increase affordable housing and boost economic development, particularly in future industries like AI and life sciences. He acknowledged the current challenges facing house-building, including high interest rates and rising construction costs, but expressed optimism that the plan would provide a framework for recovery.

Assembly Member Elly Baker raised concerns about the ongoing issue of tube noise and vibration, questioning TfL's progress and transparency. The Mayor committed to ensuring TfL provides more detailed information on rail grinding activities, track renewal programmes, and noise complaints by constituency.

Transparency was a central theme, with Assembly Member Lord Bailey of Paddington repeatedly pressing the Mayor on the delayed publication of his diary. While the Mayor asserted he is the most transparent mayor, the lack of publication for two years led to accusations of hypocrisy. The Mayor apologised for the delay and promised to investigate the reasons for the hold-up.

The use of policing technology, including live facial recognition (LFR) and artificial intelligence (AI), was also discussed. The Mayor highlighted LFR's contribution to over 2,000 arrests and its planned rollout in central London. He assured the Assembly that robust oversight and ethical scrutiny are in place.

Assembly Members also debated the Mayor's approach to housing delivery, with concerns raised about the proposed reduction in affordable housing targets for fast-track planning routes. The Mayor defended these as temporary measures to address market difficulties. The issue of pensions for elected members was resolved with the approval of access to the Local Government Pension Scheme.

For Londoners, these discussions highlight the ongoing efforts to address housing shortages, improve transport, and ensure public services are delivered effectively and transparently. The Assembly's scrutiny of the Mayor's actions remains a vital part of holding him accountable for the future of the capital.

Upcoming Meetings

Housing crisis: GLA land delivery lags

This week in Greater London Authority:

Housing Crisis Deepens: GLA Land Holdings Under Scrutiny as Delivery Lags

The Budget and Performance Committee met on Thursday, 9 July 2026, to scrutinise the performance and finances of GLA Land and Property Limited (GLAP), the Greater London Authority's (GLA) wholly-owned subsidiary responsible for developing its land holdings. The committee heard stark warnings about the slow pace of housing delivery, persistent issues with loan repayments, and a lack of transparency surrounding GLAP's financial operations.

The core of the committee's concern lies with GLAP's forecast to deliver 68,000 new homes over 25 years. Between 2016 and 2025, only approximately 29,000 homes were started, with two-thirds completed. This slow progress has directly impacted the repayment of a £300 million loan from the GLA to GLAP, originally intended as seed funding. While £85 million has been repaid, £215 million remains outstanding, and questions were raised about why the loan amount has not decreased significantly over more than a decade.

Assembly Members expressed frustration over the lack of public access to GLAP's business plan, citing commercially sensitive information as the reason for its confidentiality. This lack of transparency is particularly concerning given the substantial public funds involved. The committee heard that assumptions in the original business model have been significantly challenged by rising interest rates and inflationary pressures in the construction industry, making the current market incredibly difficult.

Concerns were also raised about GLAP's governance. The GLAP Steering Group, established in 2021, was found to lack formal terms of reference and minutes of meetings, despite meeting quarterly for two years. Auditors noted these issues in 2023, leading to questions about the oversight of informal discussions and decision-making processes. While GLAP directors stated the steering group is advisory, Assembly Members questioned the accountability of these discussions.

The committee heard that GLAP's financial sustainability relies on land receipts, not direct GLA support. However, the business plan forecasting surpluses and loan repayment ability is not publicly available. This lack of transparency makes it difficult for the Assembly to assess the true financial health of GLAP and its impact on the GLA's overall finances.

The slow delivery rates on major projects like Greenwich Peninsula and Barking Riverside were highlighted, with agreements dating back to 2002 and 2013 respectively. These historical agreements lack the controls on delivery pace expected in current contracts, contributing to the overall lag in housing output.

The committee also noted the Mayor's Decision Lists and GLA Group monitoring reports, but the primary focus remained on GLAP's performance. The Budget and Performance Committee's work programme indicates a continued scrutiny of budget and performance issues, with the next meeting scheduled for 16 September 2026.

For Londoners, the slow progress on housing delivery and the lack of transparency surrounding GLAP's finances mean that the promise of new homes, particularly affordable ones, remains uncertain. The committee's findings underscore the urgent need for greater accountability and a more robust approach to ensuring that public land is used effectively to meet London's housing crisis.

Empty Homes Crisis Worsens: GLA Housing Committee Demands Action on Vacant Properties

The Housing Committee met on Tuesday, 7 July 2026, to address the alarming rise in empty homes across London. The committee heard that the number of vacant properties has surged by 81% since 2016, reaching over 105,000 in 2025. This crisis disproportionately affects vulnerable groups, exacerbating the housing shortage and impacting community well-being.

Dr. Jonathan Bourne, an expert from UCL, described London's housing market as increasingly a financialised commodity market, attracting global investment that contributes to the growing number of empty homes. While local authority empty homes have increased by 60%, privately owned empty properties have seen a more substantial rise. Hannah Brown, Head of Housing Strategy at the GLA, noted that many council homes are empty due to refurbishment or estate regeneration, which are lengthy processes.

The committee heard that current policy interventions, such as the council tax premium, have had limited success in bringing properties back into use. Owners of high-value empty properties are often willing to pay the premium rather than let their homes. Experts suggested that a more impactful measure, like Vancouver's 1% empty homes tax, could be considered, but acknowledged the legal challenges in the UK for identifying property ownership. A more effective approach, it was argued, might be to change what is built, focusing on properties less appealing to investors and more suitable for Londoners, particularly family-sized homes.

The lack of granular data on empty homes was a recurring concern. Dr. Bourne highlighted that definitions of empty can be unclear, and councils possess detailed data that could provide a clearer picture if aggregated. This lack of transparency hinders effective policy-making and makes it difficult to understand the true scale and nature of the problem.

Tom Copley, Deputy Mayor for Housing and Residential Development, outlined the Mayor's actions, including the Council Homes Acquisition Programme and the Right to Buyback scheme, which have helped councils acquire thousands of homes. However, data on how many of these were previously empty is not recorded. The Mayor is also committed to the Homes Off The Streets programme to bring empty social rented properties back into use for former rough sleepers.

For Londoners, particularly those on housing waiting lists, the sheer number of empty homes represents a missed opportunity to alleviate the housing crisis. The committee's discussions underscore the urgent need for more robust data collection, stronger policy interventions, and increased resources for local authorities to tackle this growing problem.

Upward Extensions: A Potential Solution to London's Housing Shortage, But Hurdles Remain

The Planning and Regeneration Committee met on Wednesday, 8 July 2026, to explore the potential of upward extensions as a means to address London's housing needs. While experts highlighted significant spatial potential, the committee heard that technical, regulatory, and financial barriers are hindering the widespread delivery of these developments.

Dr. Rieta Usthuisen of HTA Design estimated that rooftop developments alone could yield around 180,000 homes in London. However, post-Grenfell fire safety regulations, such as the requirement for second staircases and sprinklers in buildings over 18 metres, add complexity and cost, making many projects unviable. Nicholas Boyes-Smith of Create Streets presented research suggesting a potential of 140,000 to 320,000 new homes through upward extensions, but stressed that the current planning regime, with its inherent uncertainty and high costs for obtaining permission, is a significant barrier.

Claire Brady from Historic England acknowledged that heritage assets do not necessarily preclude upward development, citing examples of sensitively designed extensions on listed buildings. However, she emphasised the importance of design quality and integration with the existing character of an area. The committee also heard that basements, while technically feasible, are often costly, disruptive, and can lead to habitability issues, making them a less desirable option compared to upward extensions.

Michael Holland of Populo, Newham Council's housing company, noted that while upward extensions can help families stay in their boroughs and address overcrowding, preserving local character has been a challenge, requiring significant council resources and detailed design codes. He also pointed out that new-build development on brownfield land is currently more economically viable for Populo than upward extensions on existing council housing stock.

Concerns were raised about the potential for upward extensions to lead to more Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) or for corporate investors to flip properties, driving up prices. Local authorities like Tower Hamlets and Haringey have implemented specific policies, such as Article 4 directions and prohibitions on subdivision, to mitigate these risks.

The discussion highlighted the need for more resources, knowledge sharing, and clearer guidance to unlock the potential of upward extensions. While there was broad support for this form of intensification, the committee recognised that overcoming the existing barriers requires a concerted effort from national and local government, alongside developers and residents. For Londoners, particularly those struggling with housing affordability and overcrowding, the promise of more homes through upward extensions remains largely unrealised without significant policy and regulatory changes.

GLA Oversight Committee: Workforce Diversity and Budgetary Concerns Under the Spotlight

The GLA Oversight Committee met on Wednesday, 8 July 2026, to review the GLA's workforce report and budgetary performance. The committee heard that while overall staff diversity is improving, representation at senior levels remains a challenge. Budgetary underspends were also noted, prompting questions about financial management and future funding.

The GLA Workforce Report for the year ending March 2026 indicated that Black, Asian, and minority ethnic staff representation stands at 40.4%, the highest recorded. However, representation at senior grades (12 and above) remains at 28%, a figure that has seen little improvement. Concerns were also raised about the increase in the disability pay gap, which requires further investigation beyond increased declaration rates. Dianne Tranmer, Executive Director of Corporate Resources and Business Improvement, noted that the report excludes changes from the Savings and Efficiencies Programme, with an update to follow.

The committee also discussed proposed new posts within the Specialist Housing and Services (SHS) unit. These posts are intended to meet increased demands due to new Mayoral priorities and external funding streams. While the proposals are to be covered by existing budgets, the long-term sustainability of these roles, particularly those on fixed-term contracts, was questioned.

The London Assembly Quarterly Budget Report for 2025-26 Quarter 4 showed an underspend of £562,000. This underspend was attributed to staffing vacancies, the conclusion of the Secretariat internship programme, and delays in recruitment. While no draw on the Assembly's reserve was required, the committee sought assurances about future funding and the impact of these underspends on service delivery.

The committee also authorised the engagement of an external recruitment agency for the London TravelWatch Board, with costs anticipated to be around £25,000. For GLA staff, these reports offer insights into the organisation's commitment to diversity and financial prudence. However, the persistent underrepresentation at senior levels and the reliance on fixed-term funding for crucial services highlight areas requiring continued attention and strategic planning.

London Assembly (Plenary)

London Assembly (Plenary) - Thursday, 10 September 2026 - 10.00 am

The London Assembly plenary meeting on Thursday 10 September 2026 focused heavily on the draft London Plan, with extensive discussion on housing delivery, affordable housing targets, and the implications of development on the Green Belt. The Assembly also addressed concerns regarding burial space, accessible housing data, the nighttime economy, and the use of technology in policing and public services.

September 10, 2026, 10:00 am
Economy, Culture and Skills Committee

Economy, Culture and Skills Committee - Wednesday, 9 September 2026 - 2.00 pm

The Economy, Culture and Skills Committee met on Wednesday 9 September 2026 to discuss the future funding of London's galleries and museums, including the potential for charging entrance fees and the implementation of an overnight visitor levy. The committee heard from a range of experts and museum representatives about the financial challenges facing the sector and debated various proposals for generating additional income.

September 09, 2026, 2:00 pm
Police and Crime Committee

Police and Crime Committee - Wednesday, 9 September 2026 - 10.00 am

The Police and Crime Committee convened to discuss the persistent issue of grooming gangs in London, hearing evidence that despite increased attention, the true scale of the problem remains unknown due to fragmented data and systemic failures. The committee also examined the Metropolitan Police Service's (MPS) efforts to improve its response to child sexual exploitation, including enhanced training and a shift towards a suspect-focused approach, though challenges in resourcing and consistent application of best practices were highlighted.

September 09, 2026, 10:00 am
Transport Committee

Transport Committee - Tuesday, 8 September 2026 - 10.00 am

The Transport Committee of the Greater London Authority Council met on Tuesday 8 September 2026 to discuss the Draft London Plan, focusing on sustainable access measures, industrial land safeguarding, transport infrastructure, and car clubs. Key discussions revolved around the new Sustainable Access Measure (SAM) and its implications for housing density and transport capacity, as well as the protection of industrial land for employment and logistics. The committee also addressed the funding and delivery of crucial transport infrastructure projects and the role of car clubs in promoting sustainable travel.

September 08, 2026, 10:00 am
Planning and Regeneration Committee

Planning and Regeneration Committee - Friday, 4 September 2026 - 10.00 am

The Planning and Regeneration Committee met on Friday 4 September 2026 to discuss the Draft London Plan. Key topics included the feasibility of meeting housing targets, the optimisation framework for development, the use of Green Belt land, tall buildings, data centres, and strategies for managing heat risk in new homes. The committee also reviewed the progress of previous actions and noted the upcoming work programme.

September 04, 2026, 10:00 am
Environment Committee

Environment Committee - Thursday, 3 September 2026 - 10.00 am

The Environment Committee met to discuss the draft London Plan, focusing on its environmental policies and their alignment with national planning frameworks. Key discussions revolved around changes to Green Belt policy, the Mayor's net-zero ambitions, energy efficiency standards, and the protection of natural spaces, with particular attention paid to the potential impact of development on biodiversity and the need for robust environmental enhancements.

September 03, 2026, 10:00 am
Health Committee

Health Committee - Thursday, 3 September 2026 - 2.00 pm

The Health Committee of the Greater London Authority Council convened on Thursday 3 September 2026 to discuss the significant issue of underage vaping in London. The meeting, which was confirmed to have been held, featured two panels of experts who provided insights into the health impacts, prevalence, and regulatory responses to youth vaping. Key discussions revolved around the effectiveness of the new Tobacco and Vapes Act, the role of Trading Standards, and the challenges in enforcing regulations amidst concerns about funding and resources.

September 03, 2026, 2:00 pm
GLA Oversight Committee

GLA Oversight Committee - Wednesday, 2 September 2026 - 10.00 am

The GLA Oversight Committee met to discuss the value and purpose of GLA public communications and to hear an update on countering fraud within the GLA Group. Key discussions included the effectiveness and accountability of mayoral communications, the allocation of advertising space, and the strategies employed by Transport for London (TfL) to combat fraud. Decisions were made to note the reports and delegate authority for any outputs arising from the discussions.

September 02, 2026, 10:00 am
Housing Committee

Housing Committee - Wednesday, 2 September 2026 - 2.00 pm

The Housing Committee met to discuss the Draft London Plan 2026, focusing on housing targets, affordable housing policies, and the necessary infrastructure to support new developments. Key discussions revolved around the realism of housing targets, the breakdown of affordable housing tenures, and the critical need for infrastructure investment to precede or accompany new housing developments.

September 02, 2026, 2:00 pm
Economy, Culture and Skills Committee

Economy, Culture and Skills Committee - Monday 20 July 2026 2.00 pm

The Economy, Culture and Skills Committee met on Monday 20 July 2026 to discuss the potential introduction of an Overnight Visitor Levy and the financial and operational status of the London Stadium. Key decisions included noting the reports on both topics and delegating authority to the Chair to agree any output from the discussions.

July 20, 2026, 2:00 pm
Fire Committee

Fire Committee - Tuesday, 15 September 2026 - 10.00 am

The Fire Committee of the Greater London Authority Council is scheduled to convene on Tuesday 15 September 2026. The meeting's agenda includes discussions on recent arson attacks, the committee's work programme, and responses to previous committee outputs. Additionally, the committee will review actions taken under delegated authority and consider the committee's response to a government consultation.

September 15, 2026, 10:00 am
Budget and Performance Committee

Budget and Performance Committee - Wednesday, 16 September 2026 - 10.00 am

The Budget and Performance Committee of the Greater London Authority Council is scheduled to meet on Wednesday 16 September 2026. The meeting's agenda includes a review of the Transport for London Capital Renewals programme and the Quarter 1, 2026/27 GLA Group Monitoring Reports. Additionally, the Committee will consider its work programme for the remainder of the year.

September 16, 2026, 10:00 am
Chief Officer Performance Review Panel

Chief Officer Performance Review Panel - Wednesday, 16 September 2026 - 2.00 pm

The Chief Officer Performance Review Panel is scheduled to convene on Wednesday 16 September 2026. The meeting's agenda includes the election of a Chair, the review of declarations of interest, and the performance review of the Chief Officer.

September 16, 2026, 2:00 pm
London Assembly (Mayor's Question Time)

London Assembly (Mayor's Question Time) - Thursday, 17 September 2026 - 10.00 am

The London Assembly will convene for Mayor's Question Time on Thursday 17 September 2026. The primary focus of the meeting will be for Assembly Members to put questions to the Mayor, following the presentation of the Mayor's Report.

September 17, 2026, 10:00 am
Police and Crime Committee

Police and Crime Committee - Wednesday, 23 September 2026 - 10.00 am

We do not yet have any information about the planned agenda for this meeting.

September 23, 2026, 10:00 am
Housing Committee

Housing Committee - Thursday, 24 September 2026 - 10.00 am

We do not yet have any information about the planned agenda for this meeting.

September 24, 2026, 10:00 am
Planning and Regeneration Committee

Planning and Regeneration Committee - Thursday, 1 October 2026 - 10.00 am

We do not yet have any information about the planned agenda for this meeting.

October 01, 2026, 10:00 am
Transport Committee

Transport Committee - Thursday, 8 October 2026 - 10.00 am

We do not yet have any information about the planned agenda for this meeting.

October 08, 2026, 10:00 am
Economy, Culture and Skills Committee

Economy, Culture and Skills Committee - Thursday, 8 October 2026 - 2.00 pm

We do not yet have any information about the planned agenda for this meeting.

October 08, 2026, 2:00 pm
GLA Oversight Committee

GLA Oversight Committee - Tuesday, 13 October 2026 - 10.00 am

We do not yet have any information about the planned agenda for this meeting.

October 13, 2026, 10:00 am