An NLA webinar event dissecting the results of the recent borough elections, and their implications for London’s future in an uncertain national context saw a panel of analysts explore the plight of the Conservatives in the capital, the likely relationships between the boroughs and the development sector, and the evolving built environment character of the capital in the post-pandemic period. 

 

Chaired by Leanne Tritton, founder and managing director of ING Media, there was clear agreement among the four panelists - Robert Gordon Clark of London Communications Agency, urbanist and researcher Kat Hanna, Dave Hill of website On London.co.uk and LSE London director Tony Travers - that the election results had been generally good for Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Greens, and poor for the Tories, who lost over 100 seats.

 

Labour’s capture of Barnet, Wandsworth and, sensationally, Westminster, was offset by the Tories gaining Harrow and winning the inaugural contest for Mayor of Croydon, and by the local Aspire party depriving Labour of Tower Hamlets. But these Labour reverses were largely attributable to specific local factors, the panel felt, while its advances were in keeping with more general trends across the capital. “The Conservatives have to think long and hard about how to remain competitive,” Tony Travers said.

 

Of the 32 boroughs, 21 are controlled by Labour (no overall change), six by the Conservatives (down one from 2018), three by the Lib Dems (no change), one by Aspire, and one, Havering, is again under no overall control.

 

Robert Gordon Clark drew attention to the inexperience of many of the borough leaders as they face testing times to come. He said that while councils will “increasingly see the development industry as a way to get cash in” to help fill financial gaps, at the same time “they don’t want to be criticised for attracting development”. On that theme, Dave Hill noted that Labour in Enfield, which has proposed housebuilding on Green Belt land, lost eight seats to the Tories.

 

Turning to London’s prospects more broadly against the backdrop of national politics, Kat Hanna described “lots of moving parts” in the development and planning landscape, notably Michael Gove’s Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill, and the panel as whole emphasised that the post-Covid economic geography of London and the wider south east continues to evolve, with greater home working potentially strengthening the region and any resulting vacated office space in central London being taken up by new companies, with London’s cultural and hospitality sectors recovering their former strength.

 

Less optimistically, panelists expressed disquiet at national government’s continuing “chipping away” at the powers and autonomy of the London mayoralty – the office’s relationship with the Metropolitan Police appears to be the latest target, following interventions in the new London Plan and the effective takeover of Transport for London. Summarising the feeling of the panel, Leanne Tritton said it appears that Gove’s Bill looks set to weaken the Mayor’s influence over what boroughs do. Nonetheless, it was observed that the mayoralty itself does not seem in imminent danger of abolition and that a future non-Conservative national government might restore its eroded authority.