As I’m sure you’ve been reminded one too many times by now, 2024 is a big year for elections with a general election almost certainly on the cards in the UK, and a presidential election across the pond in the USA. Before that drama, though, the UK will elect councillors and mayors across the country on 2 May.
In the capital, Labour’s Sadiq Khan is bidding for an unprecedented third term leading the London Assembly, with pollsters and bookies alike calling him the strong favourite. With a Labour government looking set to take power, this would mean the unification of London and UK powers for the first time since 2016.
But what do the Mayor of London’s powers actually consist of? In terms of fiscal responsibility, the Mayor and the London Assembly are focused on three main sectors: policing, transport and housing.
According to the Institute for Government, on policing:
“The mayor is responsible for setting the strategic direction and priorities for the Metropolitan Police ... Operational decisions remain the responsibility of the Met commissioner, who is appointed by the home secretary following consultation with the mayor. The mayor also sets the Met’s budget in consultation with the commissioner.”
On transport:
“The mayor … oversee[s] Transport for London (TfL). Alongside public transport functions, TfL is responsible for London’s strategic road network, road user charging schemes (such as the Ultra Low Emissions Zone), regulating taxis and private hire vehicles, and programmes to encourage active and sustainable travel.”
And, on housing:
“[They] produce the London Plan – a spatial development strategy which sets out a vision for how London will develop over a 20-25 year period. The mayor also allocates funding from central government’s affordable homes programme.”
Beyond these three policy areas, the mayor essentially acts as a spokesperson for the city, bringing issues to the government and consulting on strategies for future London projects. Of course, with an annual budget of roughly £20 billion, there is plenty to get done in these areas.
This is also why the three modern mayors have been defined in these areas – in particular, within transport. Ken Livingstone with the congestion charge and Oyster cards, Boris Johnson with his buses and bikes (which, in fact, were introduced by Livingstone, but only began running under Johnson) and Khan’s Ultra Low Emission Zone.
So, how has Sadiq Khan fared on policing, transport and housing, and what do he and his rivals plan to focus on if elected in the upcoming election?
The rhetoric around crime from many mayoral candidates paints a scene of an out-of-control London where gangs are free to run rampant. “London is under siege. Criminals rule the streets like they never have before” according to Tory candidate Susan Hall. Reform’s Howard Cox refers to crime levels as an “epidemic of violence”. Britain First’s Nick Scanlon is unsurprisingly vocal, claiming “London is fast becoming a Third World cesspit, where crime is rampant.”
Yes, these comments are hyperbolic, but they aren’t baseless. Violent crime has been steadily rising in London since 2016, with overall crime charges seeing a slight rise too. These basic statistics on their own may lead one to believe London is becoming a less safe place to live, with policing tactics failing to cope. Looking a little more closely though, there is a bit of confirmation bias at play here for critics of Khan.
Trends in London’s crime rates are generally favourable when compared with the rest of the UK. According to the Crime Survey for England and Wales, you are less likely to be a victim of crime in London (14.9%) compared with the national level (15.7%). As these statistics typically move in tandem with the rest of the country, this seems more indicative of Britain’s overall crime rates, dependent on a broad range of economic and social factors.
The murder rate has also fallen under Khan, continuing the decline seen under Johnson and Livingstone. Once again, this rate is lower than many other parts of the UK including Merseyside, Bedfordshire, South Yorkshire and Northumbria. Knife crime charges have roughly stayed the same, but when looking specifically at violent knife crime charges, these have fallen along with knife crime victims.
No, there has not been a dramatic crackdown on crime – stop and search methods continue to draw focus despite their ineffectiveness – but at the same time, the picture is far from the horrific portrait being painted by many pundits and politicians. Nationally and globally, London remains a comparatively safe city to live in.
Onto transport, where Khan has arguably drawn the most criticism with the introduction and expansion of the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ). Initially announced under Johnson, the ULEZ was introduced in 2020 to reduce air pollution by charging non-compliant vehicles when travelling in the zone.
The ULEZ has been expanded twice, most recently in 2023 to cover all of Greater London. This expansion has been met with major backlash in regard to the autonomy of citizens and its actual effectiveness in tackling air pollution.
Alongside an expansion in Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs) and 20mph speed limits, the general crackdown on motorists has been dubbed the ‘war on cars’ by many, and is the most homogenous talking point among mayoral candidates.
Once more, there seems to be a lot of exaggeration at play here. In terms of compliance rules, TfL’s most recent figures suggest that 95.2% of vehicles are now compliant, with only 2.9% of vehicles having to pay a charge on an average day.
Nitrous oxide levels have halved in London since 2016 as a result of green travel schemes and are now at their lowest. LTNs and 20mph limits have also helped to reduce traffic-related injuries dramatically. In a city with one of the most extensive and inter-connected public transport systems in the world, it is a struggle to find much of the criticism of the ULEZ all that compelling.
It must be said, though, that the continued dis-unification between TfL and other transport companies operating in London prevents branding trains as a ‘cheap alternative’ to driving. For example, much of south-east London is missing TfL rail services (Tube and Overground), left only to opt for private train lines such as Southeastern and Thameslink.
At peak travel times, commuting to work in central London can cost up to £15 a day. Add on regular delays and cancellations and you can imagine people’s frustrations when it’s more expensive to take a train than receive a £12.50 charge for taking the car.
City Hall did try to resolve this issue, with a motion passed last year by The London Assembly requesting to take control of Southeastern and other networks' services within the city, to “provide a truly integrated, reliable and affordable rail network for Londoners”.
Unfortunately, though, the Department of Transport responded by saying that the idea was not up for consideration. The friction of party power does no favours to proper coordination between city and government, as this example displays.
Finally, in housing, the most urgent issue for the average Londoner demands a solution: spiralling rent prices. Since 2021, annual rent price increases have risen from 1% to a staggering 9.2%, with the average monthly rent costing over £2,000.
Add in home bills, transport, council tax, childcare, groceries and many – especially key workers – are left with almost nothing from their payslip to save or spend. The effects of the cost-of-living crisis are being felt across the country, but they are particularly pertinent for working-class renters living in London.
Factors affecting the spiralling rent equate to more than just supply and demand (even when considering the squeeze from the ~5,000 uninhabited properties in the city acting as second homes), but the supply of new housing is about as much jurisdiction as the mayor has on the matter.
Efforts here have been commendable, though. Council-backed housing is currently being built in every London borough, with an average of 89 a week started since Khan came to office in 2016, totalling more than 32,000. In the previous decade before Khan’s entry, this number totalled just 3,520. Part of Khan’s re-election campaign is a pledge of a further 40,000 homes.
Of these new builds, though, those which are classed as affordable only make up a small proportion. An article from planning and development consultancy firm Lichfield outlines the shaky claim made by The London Assembly that the capital has entered a ‘golden era’ of council home building:
“The campaign refers to 20,000 new council homes having been started since 2018. In reality, this figure represents a relatively small proportion of housing need; the London Plan… identifies a need for 30,972 new low cost rented homes in London each year until 2041, and an additional 11,869 new intermediate homes. The 20,000 is equivalent to just 4,000 a year, or around 125 per year averaged across each Borough, and therefore represents only 9% of total affordable housing need.”
Plenty of new homes, yes. But once they’re on the market, how much of an impact will this have on the renting crisis? Short-term solutions ought to be considered, too, or things may reach a breaking point if prices carry on at soaring rates.
With an overall view of the work in Khan’s two terms, then, while things seem uninspiring, they are far from a disaster. Faced with the same budget restraints and austerity measures as the rest of the UK under a Conservative government, the money hasn’t been available for any drastic policies to be launched.
With this in mind, is it time for a change at the top of the London Assembly? From most of the candidates, there doesn’t seem to be much more than reactionary policy lines, lacking nuance and practical vision.
Scrapping the ULEZ expansion is unsurprisingly a popular line, with an aim to liberate and cheapen transport in London, yet no plan beyond reducing fines for those 5% of non-compliant vehicles.
Increased policing on the streets is also a recurring theme, a policy approach Khan has already utilised to the effect of 1,300 extra officers. Clearly not enough, according to Conservative, Reform and Independent candidates. Calls to ‘de-politicise the Met and transport’ are also frequent, a line which is as inane and buzzword-fuelled as SDP candidate Amy Gallagher’s slogan, ‘Stand Up To Woke’.
There are also pledges from most for new affordable housing, but how different would this look from Khan's current attempts? Does anyone have a concrete plan to aid the countless suffering from gentrification and relentless bills?
Given the socioeconomic state of London and the wider country, the upcoming mayoral election’s significance will ultimately be tame considering a general election is looming. Before there’s a shift of power in Parliament, London – as well as every other council-led part of the UK – will remain at the behest of how our government handle the recession we are all battling through.
If nothing else, though, the results on 2 May will provide an indication of the state of party popularity and the change to come.
コメント