The Budget and Performance Committee of the Greater London Authority Council convened on Tuesday 20 October 2026 to discuss critical issues facing London's policing and transport networks. Key discussions focused on the challenges of international crime benchmarking, the effectiveness of police performance measurement, and the significant financial and operational impacts of an ageing transport infrastructure. The committee also examined Transport for London's (TfL) forecasting uncertainties, the influence of changing travel demand, and the critical need for investment in maintaining London's extensive road and rail assets.

Policing Performance and Benchmarking

The committee heard from Professor Matt Ashby of UCL, who highlighted the inherent difficulties in comparing crime levels between different jurisdictions due to varying definitions and geographical boundaries. He suggested that comparing trends rather than absolute levels is a more robust approach, while acknowledging that all international comparisons are imperfect. Professor Ben Bradford from UCL noted that while the UK generally has more robust crime data than many other developed countries, this can make direct international comparisons challenging. Ian Wiggett, Associate Director for World Policing Advisory, emphasized that crime reduction is the core business of policing, but stressed the complexity of measuring police effectiveness beyond crime statistics, including factors like public trust and confidence. Dr Simon Guilfoyle, a former police officer, argued for a multidimensional approach to measuring police performance, incorporating crime rates, detection rates, response times, and public trust, and stressed the importance of statistically robust comparisons.

The discussion also touched upon the Metropolitan Police Service's (Met) performance, with Ian Wiggett suggesting that while the Met performs averagely compared to other metropolitan forces, it faces particular issues with theft and robbery. He noted that removing certain boroughs from the analysis would significantly improve London's comparative crime levels. The panel agreed that while crime rates are important, they are not the sole definer of police performance, and that factors like trust and legitimacy are paramount.

Concerns were raised about the increasing reliance on technology and AI in policing, with experts highlighting the high costs, potential for vendor lock-in, and the need for robust evidence of value for money. Professor Ashby pointed out the fragmented nature of AI adoption across police forces and the lack of comprehensive evaluation of its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Ben Bradford cautioned that new technologies can entrench existing trust issues rather than fundamentally change them, and that their introduction needs to be managed carefully with public engagement.

The committee also explored the challenges of measuring trust and legitimacy, with Ben Bradford suggesting that while these are vital intelligence for policing, they should not be used as performance targets due to the many external factors influencing public opinion. Visibility of police officers was identified as a key driver of trust, particularly in rural areas and parts of cities where police presence is low. The panel acknowledged that the changing nature of crime, with an increase in online and private-space offences, makes policing less visible, exacerbating the tension between focusing on high-harm crime and maintaining public visibility.

Transport for London (TfL) Forecasting and Investment

The committee heard from experts regarding the significant uncertainties and challenges TfL faces in forecasting passenger numbers and fare revenue. Michael Roberts, Chief Executive of London TravelWatch, highlighted that historical forecasts have often overestimated revenue, leading to pressure on investment in renewals and maintenance. Professor Stephen Glaister of Imperial College London distinguished between scientific analysis of trends and the potential for optimism bias in budget setting and mayoral policies. He suggested a need for sharper, independent scrutiny of TfL's financial analysis, drawing parallels with the Office of Rail and Road's role in the railway sector. Professor Tony Travers from LSE noted TfL's unusual reliance on fare income, which places profound pressure on accurate forecasting. He also pointed to the significant information asymmetry between TfL and external bodies like the Assembly.

The discussion revealed that TfL's forecasting has historically been prone to overestimation, with a cumulative gap of approximately £1.4 billion over 15 years. While the pandemic significantly impacted demand, the panel suggested that systemic forecasting issues may predate it. The committee noted that the decline in bus patronage, unlike on the Underground, has been persistent, and that service quality, not just fares, is a key factor in ridership.

Concerns were raised about the impact of changing travel patterns, including the rise of active travel (walking and cycling) and the potential for e-bike companies to operate without contributing revenue to TfL. The committee also discussed the challenges of managing the ageing infrastructure, with a £6.5 billion renewals backlog. Patrick Doig, TfL's Chief Finance Officer, outlined a plan to increase investment in asset renewals, aiming to reach a steady-state level of £1.1 to £1.2 billion annually. However, he acknowledged that this is dependent on securing further government funding.

The committee heard that safety is TfL's paramount priority, with rigorous inspection regimes and operational mitigations in place. However, the lack of investment has led to service impacts such as speed restrictions and weight limits on bridges, rather than direct safety compromises. The Bakerloo line trains, operating beyond their design life, were noted as being simple to maintain, but other lines, like the Piccadilly line, face challenges with ageing stock and infrastructure, particularly during adverse weather conditions.

The discussion also highlighted the significant financial implications of deferred maintenance, with a £6.5 billion renewals backlog. TfL's current investment in renewals, while increasing, remains below the steady-state level required. The committee was informed that TfL's reliance on fare income makes it more vulnerable to forecasting inaccuracies compared to other global transport authorities. The lack of a national funding model for highway structures and the uncertainty surrounding short-term funding settlements with the government were identified as major challenges.

Finally, the committee noted the potential for a future integrated road-user charging system to contribute to funding infrastructure maintenance, and the need for TfL to consider the impact of climate change on its assets, including extreme heat and flooding. The discussion also touched upon the potential for publicly owned bus operators to improve financial sustainability, though historical evidence suggests private tendering has led to significant cost reductions.