Appendix 1
London Assembly Environment Committee – Tuesday 13 July 2021
Transcript of Agenda Item 9 – London's Engagement with COP26
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Can I welcome our guests here in the Chamber. We have Peter Daw, Interim Assistant Director of Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change for the Greater London Authority (GLA) and Elliot Treharne, Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy GLA. Thank you very much for joining us. Joining us virtually is Frances Way, the Executive Director of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC). For our first hour only we also have Keith Bottomley, Vice Chairman of Policy and Resources Committee and Chairman of the Environmental Services Committee of the City of London Corporation. Please also note we are going to be joined by Farhana Yamin, an Adviser for the Climate Vulnerable Forum and Associate Fellow, Chatham House
If I can kick off with the first question, which is to Frances Way. What is the role of London and other global cities in combatting climate change and supporting the [UN Climate Change] Conference of the Parties (COP) goals?
Frances Way (Executive Director, United Nations Framework Convention): To introduce my role very quickly, I head up the Climate Champions Team, which is the team that supports Gonzalo Muñoz [High Level Champion] of Chile from COP25 and Nigel Topping [High Level Champion] of the United Kingdom (UK) from COP26, who are the United Nations (UN) High Level Climate Action Champions. We work very closely with the UNFCCC - I am not employed by the UNFCCC - and in partnership with the UK Presidency. The Champions have this mandate to work with the non-state actor community. That is the cities, the regions, the businesses, investors, civil society, to strengthen ambition, accelerate action, and facilitate that collaboration between the non-state actors and the parties.
In terms of cities and the role that they should play, and in particular London, COP21 in Paris delivered the promise the world was going to act on climate change and COP26 in Glasgow has to show this action is a reality. Therefore there is going to be a sharp focus on immediate action and what we need to achieve by 2030, as well as recognition that implementation of the Paris Agreement can only really be achieved through coordinated action and mass collaboration across the whole of society. Since cities represent more than half the world’s population, 80% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and more than 75% of energy-related emissions, we recognise that cities are really powerful climate leaders with political clout. They can, from a policymaker point of view, incubate supply, demand and finance levers. As centres of commerce and finance and culture and innovation, cities are really important in terms of the solutions needed and being on the front line of implementation. Many cities, including London, are already dealing with the impacts of climate change, such as heatwaves and flooding. Therefore, the role of cities at COP26 is really important.
What we are asking cities to do is join our campaign Race to Zero, which London is already in. This is a global campaign to rally leadership and support from all stakeholders by committing to net-zero by mid-century at the latest and halving emissions by 2030. As London is already in, what it really can do is help us get to the target of 1,000 cities by COP26 - we are currently at 733 - and use its influence with other cities to really show how this is done, role-model what can be done and the ambition needed and bring others along and share learning.
1
Join the Race to Resilience, is a sibling campaign [to Race to Zero], which is about improving resilience, especially in marginalised and vulnerable communities. But more generally for all cities we are expecting them to take action from a transport perspective, banning the sale of passenger internal combustion engine vehicles by 2035; committing to a zero emissions area, which London is very good at; decarbonising public transport such as shifting to zero emission buses; committing to 100% decarbonised power by 2035; phasing out coal in cities where it is used; and thinking about urban development to curtail sprawl and promote compact cities that encourage active transport or transit-orientated development. We are expecting them to adopt environment policies that require new buildings to operate at net zero carbon by 2030 and all buildings at net zero by 2050 and to commit to protect and restore natural habitats from a nature point of view. From a finance point of view, to think about assets and pension funds that can be divested from fossil fuel companies as soon as possible. But also, most importantly, advocating for national policies on planning, transport, air quality, etc, and working with the local authority leaders to implement them.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Thank you very much, Frances. Keith, could I ask you a similar question, for brief opening remarks in terms of the role of London and other global cities in combatting climate change and supporting those COP goals?
Keith Bottomley (Vice Chairman of Policy & Resources Committee, Chairman of the Environmental Services Committee, City of London Corporation): It is very good to be here. Apologies, I have to leave by 11.00am to Chair the Environment Committee of the City of London Corporation. I am happy to follow up on any of the conversations separately.
Cities are clearly crucial here, as Frances has said. It is the case that by 2080 the world will have 10 billion people, 80% of them will be in 10,000 cities. There is just no alternative to well-run, low-carbon cities if we are going to have 10 billion people on a finite planet. That really is the starting point for me. There is also now a very clear understanding of what it takes to decarbonise a city, whether you are looking at a coalition on urban transitions or clean or connected or compact, electrification, etc. There is an awful lot of coalescence around what is required.
The critical factor in all of this principally is finance. COP26 for all, and for the City of London Corporation in particular, presents a really crucial opportunity to demonstrate that private sector finance stands ready to invest in green transition. Not just the green transition needed in London, but elsewhere. We are working very hard to advance that agenda, Chair.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Thank you very much, Keith. I am going to hand over to Assembly Member Devenish.
Tony Devenish AM (Deputy Chairman): To Elliot to start off with, how will the Mayor use COP26 to promote the objectives of the London Environment Strategy?
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): We might do a swap: to explain to the Committee, Peter [Daw] and I do a job share and we divvy up various things between us. If we jump in on slightly different questions, apologies for that, but it might mean that you get slightly better answers. Therefore, Pete, I will hand that one over to you.
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director, Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): Thank you, Elliot. Both of the speakers already have set out the role that cities need to play in terms of taking climate action. In relation to both the Low-Emission Zone (LEZ) and our own 2
climate commitments, we are developing a programme of activity, along with partners, both in the leadup to and during COP itself. The reasons for that are four: one is to showcase London as a leader in tackling climate change. That is fair. That drives economic growth and also drives the improvements in equalities we want to see in the city as well across all of the COP themes, energy transitions, clean transport, green financing, nature, adaptation and resilience.
COP26 also presents an important part of the journey for the Mayor in terms of making the case to central government for greater funding and devolved powers to help us go quicker and accelerate our activity in London to help us achieve 2030 while showcasing what we can do as well. It presents a great opportunity for us to encourage sectors we need to do more to take action as well. The business sector, the finance sector, for example, two key sectors we need to see really taking the mantle in London. Also, it presents a great chance to inspire Londoners and London stakeholders to commit and do more in relation to improving the city we live in.
The Mayor and the Deputy Mayor today are at the UK100 National Net Zero Conference making the case to the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) for greater involvement, coordination and devolution of powers to local government and cities, as an example of some of the work we are currently doing. They are currently in there right at this moment, which is why you have Elliot and I today.
We also have a range of other activities, which I have already started. We had London Climate Action Week at the end of June and beginning of July. Again, we used that as a staging post for talking to particular stakeholders we want to see take more action and inspiring them to do so. Therefore we held a London Business Climate Summit and we had around 200 attendees at that where we were able to showcase some of the London business climate leaders and the actions they are taking towards accelerating progress to net zero. I will pause there if it is OK.
Tony Devenish AM (Deputy Chairman): Assembly Member Cooper made a very valid point earlier but I do respectfully disagree with it when she said this meeting should be later in the cycle before November. We have several months now to November. Could you provide a programme of what you are doing to the Committee, subsequently to this meeting, so that we can really get a feel? Because my view is we need to be really focusing now to make sure we have those discussions right through from now until November, therefore the earliest possible this meeting could be is now. Therefore I am grateful to the Chair for holding the meeting now. Do you think we could have a programme of exactly what you are doing going forward?
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director, Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): Yes. It has been a challenging context to prepare for COP, not least the fact it is delayed and still waiting clarity, and we have been waiting for some time for clarity on exactly how COP will work. It has been a challenging context, which means we are not alone in playing catchup with COP plans for the year. A number of our partners are also currently developing plans. Happy to give you a fuller, more definitive list of the programme of work as we are developing it going forward. More than happy to come back to you, Assembly Member Devenish, on the details of that.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Thank you. Assembly Member Cooper.
Léonie Cooper AM: When do you think that might be, that you might be able to come back to us with that greater detail? Is that available now?
3
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director, Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): There are elements of the work programme, which are confirmed, and elements which are still being agreed or we are still receiving details for. Therefore it depends on how definitive you want that list to be and recognising of course that things will change in that agenda or new opportunities will emerge as well. For example, the COP work itself, we are largely engaged with C40 [Cities Climate Leadership Group] in terms of the planning for how we operate at COP. That is still in the very early stages. I would think probably over the course of the next month we would be in a clearer position to give you more detail certainly on the plan from now until November.
Léonie Cooper AM: With all due respect, my feeling was that having the plan available for us to scrutinise at this meeting, or if the meeting were slightly later, would have made more sense. But that is obviously a personal view and we are having the meeting today.
Good morning, Farhana [Yamin, Adviser, Climate Vulnerable Forum and Associate Fellow, Chatham House]. We have heard from the GLA and also from the City of London and from Frances [Way] about the more governmental approach on this. But do you think there is a role for civil society in London’s engagement with COP26?
Farhana Yamin (Adviser, Climate Vulnerable Forum and Associate Fellow, Chatham House): Absolutely. Overall, I have been involved in the climate negotiations for about 30 years and my learning is that we overemphasised policy legislation and what I would say is a top-down approach. We did not bring the issues of climate change, of nature protection, of things like the circular economy, the sustainable development goals (SDG), home at the street level, at the high street level, at the level where local government operates. There have been lots of efforts but in fact the priority, the political bandwidth, the resources, the legislation that is needed to support greater involvement, not just for citizens, but of local government taking things forward, has been lacking relative to the international level, relative to the UN summits that I have taken part in.
What is really important is to get far more citizen engagement in through a number of different types of methodologies, participatory budget-making, citizens assemblies, citizens juries. In Camden we tried to use pop-up spaces on the high street, to convert disused or underused buildings for community action and to engage a much wider group of organisations and networks in climate action than just the environmental, the traditional groups. You can do that by making sure that climate is part and parcel of many of the other ways in which housing, transport, planning and infrastructure and all those decisions are communicated and engaged with. It is really about bringing climate into every single aspect of life and bringing that all down to our high streets and our tenants associations. Our community centres are great assets connected to ordinary people day-to-day. They have a tremendous excitement and interest and everyone wants to know, “How can I take part?”
It is a great time to involve a lot more people and to go outside of the traditional green or environmental groups to a much broader group of people who are now interested and aware of the problems that our changing climate is bringing. But also the opportunities that it is bringing to create green jobs, to create healthier streets, healthier food, cleaner air and so forth.
Léonie Cooper AM: That is a very interesting answer because it sounds to me as though there is, not just a role for climate civil society groups in engaging with COP, but it almost sounds from what you are saying that translating what COP might mean - which a lot of people would not necessarily be familiar with as yet another
4
acronym - but translating that back for a wider audience on the street. I am struck by the fact that you see a role for interpretation, if you like, of what it is about.
Could I turn to Keith. I wondered if you think that these multilateral conferences - and it is also a multilayer conference, you have a lot of different people turn up to the COP - does it provide an effective platform for someone like the Mayor of London to advance his climate ambitions do you think?
Keith Bottomley (Vice Chairman of Policy & Resources Committee, Chairman of the Environmental Services Committee, City of London Corporation): If it is got right and the agenda is got right absolutely. It has to be. COP26 has to be more than finance talking to finance. That is quite clear. Our role we see as the City of London Corporation is very much working to convene the industry. We have signed up seven strategic partners to ensure that finance has a strong voice at COP26 and that we champion the UK leadership. Of course that is something that we are uniquely placed to be able to do cross-sector and cross-border as well.
But COP26 is more than just the event. We see the runup to COP26 as important as the event itself and indeed the follow-up. We are planning to host a hybrid virtual summit at the event itself. We have a series of activities and engagement that we are planning through to November, which Catherine McGuinness [Chair of the Policy and Resources Committee, City of London Corporation] were talking through with the Deputy Mayor for Environment and Energy, Shirley Rodrigues, on Friday. We are very keen to join up here and to support the GLA, the Mayor, and the London Councils of course, in putting all of the focus on a joined-up and coordinated basis into COP26 and tracking into the activity programmes that we are all developing.
Léonie Cooper AM: Thank you, Keith. You are quite right to remind us that it is not just about the Mayor of London; it is also about the 32 boroughs as well as the City, London being such a large place and very complicated in that way. Getting everybody on board is so important.
Could I ask Frances whether having a climate conference in the UK is an opportunity for London’s own decarbonisation and net zero path to be accelerated. In 2016 the Mayor’s target was 2050. In his 2021 manifesto he had brought that forward to 2030. Can COP help us meet the new 2030 target and, if so, how?
Frances Way (Executive Director, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change): Having the UK hosting COP26 should definitely bolster climate action in London. It is a huge opportunity to show London as a leader. But in terms of having that platform, really the focus needs to be on the credible implementation. The targets are very strong from London but we do know that beyond the no-regrets actions that the city can take, which are using the Mayor’s own levers, there is an entire systems transformation required, which needs collaboration with finance, with business, with trade unions, with the local authorities, advocating for national policy frameworks that support all the changes that are needed in terms of energy and transport and buildings, etc. Therefore I would see it more as a reminder that we are in the spotlight; that it needs to be credible; that it cannot just be aspirational. In particular, what those immediate steps are and how to solve those issues of what cannot be done by the city itself in terms of London’s own powers and how to start to address that in that collaborative way. COP26 is going to be all about that collaboration and co- ordinated effort, therefore I would see that as the opportunity to really use.
Léonie Cooper AM: Maybe Peter or Elliot can tell us something a bit more about where we are in London. COP26 has four aims, including to secure global net zero by mid-century and to keep 1.5º within reach. The Mayor has undertaken a lot of work to decarbonise transport in London and has goals for new homes in London enshrined particularly in the London Plan. Is this enough on its own however to move London to net zero? If not, what more is planned? 5
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director, Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): Transport and new homes are important elements of a net zero plan, but of course they cannot deliver the plan entirely on their own. Transport emissions are roughly around a quarter of London’s greenhouse gas emissions, for example, and the buildout rate of new homes is about 1% or 2% of our building stock a year. Clearly that leaves some very large areas where we need to do more.
It is important to reflect on those two particular areas for a second because they are areas where the Mayor does have strong powers and we see the impacts of those strong powers in terms of being able to genuinely push forward and go further. The London Plan, for example, is pushing well ahead of national building regulations. We are securing carbon dioxide (CO2) savings of 40% over and above what is expected through national building regulations through the use of the Mayor’s powers. That is a really great example of, where local authorities and regional authorities have powers and are able to use them, they can really strike forward and do more. I am sure Elliot will come on to talk about the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) as another very good example that we see very impactful benefits from in the city, both in terms of air quality and greenhouse gas emissions.
But turning to is that enough? Clearly it is not. There are other sectors we need to act on. Principally there is the retrofit of workplaces and homes. Roughly one-third of London’s emissions for each of those sectors. We need to also decarbonise heat in particular and look to bring onstream more renewable energy in the city as well.
They are broadly the key areas we need to focus on. We have a range of programmes already in place, which are supporting boroughs and the private sector to accelerate the number of projects they are delivering in London. We have Retrofit Accelerator for homes and workplaces, which are providing the technical support to help speed up and deliver more in terms of retrofitting of properties. We have the Local Energy Accelerator as well, which is supporting the take-up of low carbon and zero carbon heating solutions as well as renewable energy generation in buildings too.
We have a range of other mechanisms the Mayor is using, the Mayor’s Energy Efficiency Fund (MEEF), for example, which to date has secured about £250 million of private and public sector investment into projects in London.
We need to do more but it is also important to say, irrespective of whether the target is 2050 or 2030, it is not a target London can deliver on its own or the Mayor can deliver on his own. That has always been very clear. With the trajectory to 2050, about half of the measures we need to see need to be delivered by others, in particular Government, in order for us to hit net zero. Therefore we need action from many people and the collaboration point has already been made. It is extremely important we work with London’s local authorities and other key anchor institutions through the Green New Deal to drive this activity forward as well and also importantly make the case for greater funds to arrive into London to support this important work from Government.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): I'm going to have to interrupt you there, just because time is not on our side, neither for the planet nor for this meeting and we just need to get moving. I'm going to move to Assembly Member Bokhari.
Hina Bokhari AM: This is a question for Frances about learning from others. Is there a city the size of London, which is clearly ahead of us in engaging with COP26? For example, engaging with stakeholders in the
6
private sector and supporting different industries to move to net zero. If so, what lessons can London learn from that particular city?
Frances Way (Executive Director, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change): We work generally with cities as a whole and issues like the C40, which London is very active in, are a great way for the different cities to come together and learn in different ways. I would say London is not a laggard in many ways. I do not know if I would point out a particular city that is doing better in all ways. Obviously, different cities have different challenges and they are approaching things in different ways and there is great sharing. I do not want to make it over-competitive to avoid that through organisations like the C40.
Hina Bokhari AM: I am happy for anyone else to come in if they feel they have good examples.
Frances Way (Executive Director, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change): Also, we are really keen to make sure for the active participation at COP26 that we are not having individual cities or businesses standing up and saying how great they are. We want to see people coming together, showing that basically, if we do not all do this, the world is not going to get to 1.5º. It is a race we are all in together and in that sense everybody has to be doing more than they are probably prepared to do. They have to be sharing and they have to really have that sense of solidarity and not thinking, “We are the leader here so we can relax.” None of us can relax right now and we need to take all the best things happening. There are hundreds of examples through organisations like C40, all those examples are massively powerful in terms of giving the negotiators the confidence to be bolder and we really need to show those good stories of transitions being underway and people prepared to address the challenges that they are facing in their city to go forward. But London’s participation in C40 is a great way for that kind of learning. I know it is happening and I know they are getting a lot from it and other cities are getting a lot from London.
Hina Bokhari AM: Thank you, Frances. As long as London is leading the way, we are on the right track.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Moving to the next section, which is London Environment Strategy. My first question is for Keith Bottomley. Are the London Environment Strategy and Climate Action Plan ambitious enough? We know this is a climate emergency. We know we potentially need to go faster. Are we going fast enough and is the urgency there?
Keith Bottomley (Vice Chairman of Policy & Resources Committee, Chairman of the Environmental Services Committee, City of London Corporation): The answer to the specific question of are we going fast enough? My view on this and the City Corporation’s view is - and it really is a question of what underpinned our own Climate Action Strategy - that whatever you say you are going to do, you have to be able to deliver. It has to be deliverable in decarbonisation and resilience terms. But it has to be affordable and fundable. Everything boils down to policy or funding when you look at climate change. Policy, whether that is national government or London or other city governments, or local government, having the policy, the powers to do what needs to be done to tackle the decarbonisation challenges.
But when you get into areas like retrofitting: retrofitting is a huge part of this challenge, domestically and commercially. The funds that are required are significant. In general terms, there is no shortage of private funding looking for decarbonisation opportunities. There is an interesting equation to balance and matching the demand side and the supply side is a key part of this for there to be enough investable and fundable projects and programmes. That is a role that we see the financial professional services and insurance sector particularly playing.
7
But to answer your question in short, it really is a question of the timescale having to be driven by the ability to come up with the money.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Thank you very much, Keith. On that subject, can I move to Elliot or perhaps Peter or both. What is the Mayor doing to convene, mobilise and influence the private and financial sector, global chief executive officers (CEO) and industry leaders to support London’s efforts to achieve net zero?
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director, Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): The Mayor’s manifesto has a commitment to deliver a London finance facility this mayoral term. We have engaged with the Green Finance Institute in exploring options for how we drive up the levels of finance we need to see to deliver net-zero. Thinking about the 2050 plan just for a moment, the infrastructure costs of that are about £61 billion to give you the context of what is required. The City of London Corporation has already talked about the opportunity and the need for that. It is quite interesting, if you look at the UK economy, about 96% of green finance at the moment comes out of the city of London. It is from London; therefore we have a strong base to build from.
We will be working and we have worked with the Green Finance Institute (GFI) already with different private finance institutions to explore some of the barriers. We will be developing those ideas over the summer to continue those discussions and develop the plan over this term to start to accelerate funding into London. It is important to say that it is not a piece of work that just starts today. We are already funding, we have mechanisms in place, for example the MEEF, which I mentioned earlier, which has driven already about £250 million of investment into projects and is helping to drive a pipeline of projects forward. That is really important that we do not just wait for the next solution to arrive; that we build on what we have.
Another example of how we are engaging at the moment is through a joint power purchase agreement, joint collaboration across the GLA group where we are exploring as part of that developing a platform to support the investment in renewable energy to support the GLA group and renewable power to the group providing the ability for both public and private sector actors to invest in that opportunity as well. A couple of examples there of what we are doing.
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): Chair, if I could just perhaps add one on the transport decarbonisation side. Again, a huge number have shown an interest from commercial actors, especially in London, both in terms of rolling out the electric vehicle charging infrastructure we needed and also in terms of the investment that we need in bus electrification, which we are trying to accelerate. What was really exciting was one example, which we hope to replicate and continue to build on, is the Mayor’s Electric Vehicle [Infrastructure] Taskforce, which brought together all the key players in that area to enable us to make sure that we do have the charging infrastructure that we will need to meet the goals we have for decarbonisation of our transport fleet.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Thank you. As a follow-up, how is the Mayor engaging with central government to promote the climate ambitions?
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director, Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): In a number of ways. I talked already about the Mayor being at the UK100 event today with Government. There is that direct dialogue with Government Ministers around our priorities and needs. We use consultation responses, of which there are plenty of those opportunities in the last year or two, to put across our ambitions where we are working with London Councils to focus on priority areas, which
8
we want to jointly lobby on. So retrofit is one of those areas where there is a really compelling case, which we need to be making strongly together.
We have also then engaged with the planning powers with the development community to showcase the importance of the work we have done with the London Plan and giving local authorities and regional authorities the chance to go further. It was having that sort of coalition of people saying the same thing so that it is not always the same voices has been incredibly important. There is that part.
The second part is then the evidence base demonstrating the impact of what we are doing, not just for London, but more widely. A good example of that would be bus electrification where many of the benefits of electrifying London’s bus fleets, while they have the direct benefit in London on air quality in particular, and health, there are wider benefits to the UK economy of delivering that in other regions, which we are making the case for as well. There is a range of ways in which we do that.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Thank you very much. Assembly Member Sheikh.
Sakina Sheikh AM: Thank you very much, Chair, and good morning to the Assembly and to our guests. It is good to be joining you all today. Before I move on to my question, I wanted to quickly follow up on that line of questioning, Chair, around the climate ambitions of the Government and City Hall and how we work collaboratively. I really enjoyed your answer about creating a coalition of voices, both with local government, but also interested parties, to ensure that when we do collaborate with the Government our voice has strength. Part of our relationship with the Government is to push the Government to do better on their climate ambitions and equally for them to encourage us. To that end, I wondered if either yourself, Peter, or Elliot, could draw a little bit of a distinction between London’s climate ambitions and the Government’s climate ambitions and how we can reconcile that and perhaps generally pull out best practice.
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): I could start off with one practical example of where we have had quite a positive influence in terms of Government policy. That is, if you think about the Government’s commitment that from 2030 sales of internal combustion engine cars and vans will be phased out. You can see the Mayor adopting a commitment for 2030 when the Government was adopting a 2040 target, it was pretty influential in terms of the evidence base and in terms of demonstrating what we thought was possible. As Peter was just explaining, it is bringing together the coalition of voices to make the case of why there could be an earlier date.
As you then saw in terms of the change in Government policy from 2040 to 2030, that does show the influence that we can have working in concert with other actors as well. Therefore it is a positive relationship in some ways, in terms of that cities - and this goes to the point about COP as well - can be laboratories of innovation and demonstrate what is possible. ULEZ is another great example where the Government has then rolled out across the country what they call Clean Air Zones, which are basically versions of the ULEZ. Again, it shows you the ability that we have to influence national debate and also to push for more ambition at the national level.
As Peter was also explaining, this is a virtuous circle. The work that we do in London has spill-over benefits across the whole country particularly at this crucial time, in terms of the recovery, in terms of jobs and economic growth.
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director, Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): If I may add one more example as well. Recently BEIS has awarded us about 9
£3.5 million to develop a centre of excellence around social housing. Again, in recognising the work we have done to date, which is ahead of other regions, they want to see that sort of work replicated and that opportunity replicated. That is an example of where we have pushed further and, in doing so, Government have recognised that and want us to share and make those toolkits and frameworks available nationally as a way of accelerating action in an area where we need to make great strides. We have 750,000 social homes in London, therefore clearly very important to us and our approach, but the knock-on benefits are seen in translating that and allowing other regions to benefit from it as well.
Sakina Sheikh AM: Thank you. I am certainly pleased that our pushing further is having a positive impact on the national debate, as you have said, and I like the idea of a virtuous circle. Hopefully more work like that can continue.
I will move on to the set of questions that I was hoping to speak with you about and this could be to either Peter or Elliot and perhaps, Frances if you wanted to come in on this as well. What is the evaluation of the impact of London Climate Action Week? Has this contributed to advancing the London Environment Strategy goals?
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director, Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): London Climate Action Week just had its third year. The first year we were very heavily involved in establishing the London Climate Action Week. The last two years it has been managed by E3G, a small environmental non-governmental organisation (NGO) who deliver and coordinate the programme. We remain active and supportive of London Climate Action Week in terms of hosting our own events and showcasing work we are doing, both through the Mayor and through partnerships that we run such as the London Climate Change Partnership.
In terms of the impact, I was just looking at some figures, in the first year we had around about 170 events in 2019 and that has grown to about 245 events. The key thing is that issue around convening and collaboration, creating the opportunities for people to engage and learn and understand. I could not give you any percentage impact of something like that, but in terms of engaging, getting people excited, talking, hearing about ways in which they can action to net zero, it is incredibly important. An important part of the plan, it keeps London on the map, both nationally and internationally, as seen by Government Ministers who support the event and wider speakers internationally who attend as well. It is an important part of demonstrating and showcasing the role, that actors in London and wider, are taking on climate.
Sakina Sheikh AM: Fantastic, thank you. It keeps London on the map and it keeps climate on the map. Good to hear that Government Ministers are engaging on that. I will move on to the next question unless Frances wanted to come in on that at all.
Frances Way (Executive Director, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change): I would add to it that it is important because New York Climate Week has been on the global map of climate action for some time. It is linked to the UN General Assembly dates. Having something earlier in the year and having London put on a global agenda showcasing London finance, London business, London academics, London civil society, the local authorities, it is a brilliant way to tackle some of the trickier conversations that were definitely had at this year’s London Climate Action Week that really show our expertise in the global debate. It is a really positive thing and hopefully it will be physical next year.
Sakina Sheikh AM: Thank you. On the theme of evaluation of our work on climate, do we have enough mechanisms and effective mechanisms to evaluate the progress and the impact of the London Environment 10
Strategy more broadly? I will direct it at Peter and Elliot and then if any of the online guests want to come in, please do.
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director, Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): In terms of the London Environment Strategy, one of the things that we have done in the past is to report against our progress in terms of delivering that. We have the intention later this year to issue a further report against our progress in terms of implementation.
The other key mechanisms that we have internally are regular dashboard reporting that we do against a whole range of activity being led by our team, which of course a huge part of that is around delivering the London Environment Strategy.
We also, as you will probably see, have a number of inventories, which are really key resources in terms of being able to understand the overall picture of what is happening in London. On the climate side you have the London Energy and Greenhouse Gas Inventory (LEGGI) and on the air quality side you have the London Atmospheric Emissions Inventory (LAEI), which are atmospheric inventories to understand what is happening in terms of emissions.
Then the cherry on top, from an air quality perspective, and a valuable resource is the work that we have done over a number of years, nearly 30-odd years, with Imperial - and previously King’s College - London in terms of the monitoring of air quality in London and building on that with the Breathe London Network, which is going to give much more localised and individually relevant understanding of exposure to air pollution at sites like hospitals and schools. This is so valuable because the reason we have an Environment Strategy is around the outcomes that affect Londoners. It is about the cleaner air, it is about a greener city, it is about making that contribution to tackling climate change. We are very lucky in the GLA in terms of the way that we have that monitoring capacity, it means that we can articulate that story of the impact of some of our policies. One that I work very closely on is the ULEZ. It is important to Londoners for us to be able to communicate the actions that we are taking and that they are contributing to are helping to bring about the changes that we need.
We are in a very strong position in terms of being able to communicate and explain the impact of the London Environment Strategy and to make sure we understand what it is doing and to keep that under review.
Sakina Sheikh AM: I have a couple more questions and I will speed through them. One is directed to Farhana around the civil society engagement on their evaluations of the London Environment Strategy. But also I wanted to follow up as well on divestment with Frances based on her last answer. Farhana, if I might just bring you in, this is about - preaching to the converted already - civil society is the groundswell that over the last few years has made sure that climate has stayed at the top of our political agenda, whether that is the climate strikers, The Wretched of the Earth, or the fantastic work that you have been doing. Do civil society have enough mechanisms to engage with the London Environment Strategy? Does it address their concerns adequately?
Farhana Yamin (Adviser, Climate Vulnerable Forum and Associate Fellow, Chatham House): In general, event-based forms of engagement do not work in the long run. It is great that we have London Climate Week. It is better than not having London Climate Week. But when you have event-based forms, then they happen and there is no longer-term impact unless that has already been built in. Although it is fantastic to report the number of events that have increased and each event is a component usually of a project. What we are seeing is it is much better to embed climate in everyday conversations, in everyday ordinary happenings, in libraries, in community centres, where ordinary people can carry on those conversations, start those 11
conversations, satisfy their curiosity and come together to collaborate projects. There are going to be a huge number of buildings all across the world - London included - office spaces that need new uses. As well as all councils, all local authorities, having access to premises that they can turn over to those citizens for three months, six months, nine months, and allow those communities to themselves frame climate action alongside all of the other things that they want to talk about and engage in.
Overall, yes, forms of engagement are increasing, but not at the pace and at the scale that they want. The important thing is, not just to focus on transport and housing, big as they are, but also lifestyles and life choices, and how much we are willing to take risk to change the localities and the structures around us. Those are travel, food, fashion, those are entry points that people feel far more connected to and we are not really providing the physical or intellectual spaces on a daily basis for that engagement to take place. That is why these climate emergency centres, other social spaces, are really important for us to set up and keep going and find small amounts of money and small amounts of support. Larger amounts are also great but they [climate emergency centres] typically do not require huge amounts [of money].
In terms of evaluation, you cannot just stop at the number of events. That is an easy metric to put on our evaluations. You have to look at to what extent can we start to construct metrics that look at behaviour change and support for shifting mindsets. That is a bit more tricky but it can be done and it is already happening. Community is the new COP and we should be thinking all the time about how we make that happen. As was rightly pointed out, the COP in the end is a culmination of a two-week period, but the run-up to it and the preparatory parts of it and the follow-up to it require this everyday way of thinking and behaving and providing governance that supports ordinary people being a part.
As it is difficult to intervene, London with its huge diversity, you have 30% to 40%, and in some boroughs higher, Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) groups, people from diasporas, people with first-hand lived experience now of the climate crisis, whether it is Sudan, Yemen, Somalia, whether it is Pakistan, or our North American friends who are suffering a heatwave. We have people with lived experience all around us and a lot of them are not engaged and do not see themselves as holders of knowledge and a holders of new ways of tackling this. That is again something that we can tap into in a much more embodied and engaged way, and that is what we are trying to do.
Sakina Sheikh AM: Thank you. Before I pass on to Assembly Member [Hina] Bokhari, because I know we are rapidly running out of time, I wanted to briefly ask Frances about fossil fuel divestment. I know the Mayor has done a fantastic job of divesting the London Pensions Fund Authority (LPFA) fund and continues to do so. He also has set the ambition of divesting the Transport for London (TfL) pension funds. I know first-hand the Deputy Mayor Shirley Rodrigues, has been working with London Councils for the last few years to set the ambition on fossil fuel divestment of local government pension funds. So much fantastic work has been happening, not just at City Hall, but from the activists and the local councils to ensure that happens. I wanted to ask you how important do you think that divestment work is in achieving net zero and what steps would you like to see to continue to see that happening?
Frances Way (Executive Director, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change): It is divest and then reinvest in the right solutions. It is really important. The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) 1.5 degrees roadmap shows that we do not need any more exploration of fossil fuels and we really need to move on this quite quickly. Any pension fund that is financing ongoing fossil fuel production needs to think about the impacts it is going to have in that sense and the outcomes it is hoping to achieve through that. But it is difficult for individual portfolio managers or particularly for more passive ones to do that on their own. But there is quite a big tidal shift at the moment in the finance community and London should be leading by 12
example in terms of its own pension funds. When it comes to pension funds the value needs to be there in 30 to 50 years’ time for a lot of the beneficiaries and if you are in fossil fuels I doubt that is going to be hugely profitable by the time those people retire. Therefore, in terms of fiduciary duty, it makes sense. As we shift finance, it will have a big systemic effect in other ways as well and we need to keep everybody focused on that.
Sakina Sheikh AM: Fingers crossed. Thank you, Chair.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Thank you, Assembly Member Sheikh. Keith Bottomley [Vice Chairman of Policy & Resources Committee, Chairman of the Environmental Services Committee, City of London Corporation] has had to go and I know Frances has to go at 11.00 am too, just to extend the thanks of all the Committee Members for giving up your time today. We always appreciate people coming to talk to us. Thank you.
I am going to go to Assembly Member Bokhari and then Assembly Member Best to finish off this section.
Hina Bokhari AM: Thank you. This is a question for Peter or Elliot. Considering the Mayor has a target that no biodegradable or recycled waste is sent to landfill by 2026 and that, by 2030, 65% of London’s municipal waste is recycled, would you not agree that we need some interim targets and annual reporting so that we can make sure that we are in progress and that we are on track to make sure that we do reach those particular targets? If we are keeping track of this, then we know that we are OK, we are going to make that target. Otherwise we are missing out on something here.
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director, Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): We do currently assess performance every year. Waste statistics are produced every year; therefore we do get a sense of where we are in relation to those targets. The 2026 and 2030 targets are quite close. The 2026 target in itself, I would see that as a steppingstone to 2030 anyway. I am not sure how useful it would be to set more interim targets, rather it is a case of focusing on efforts to achieve those two. But we do have mechanisms there that allow us to assess the performance of London particularly on municipal waste.
Hina Bokhari AM: Are you feeling confident?
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): In terms of are we feeling confident, it is worth flagging that there is quite a lot of activity at the national level at the moment in terms of which will bring additional funding in, which we hope will enable further action in terms of reducing waste and recycling. That will give us greater confidence for those targets. If you want a further update, I am happy to write to you with something in a bit more detail.
Hina Bokhari AM: I appreciate that, thank you very much.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Assembly Member Best.
Emma Best AM: Thank you and good morning, everyone. It was a really interesting discussion on COP26 and I hope, Chair, that gives you the opportunity and the Group Leads to write some recommendations in a timely fashion so that those can give the Mayor and officers a chance to take on board what we discuss today.
My question, following on from Assembly Member Sheikh, it came up about the progress reporting and from Assembly Member Bokhari too. Back on 21 February [2021] you said to Assembly Member Russell that the next progress report would be finished in the next few months. We have not had one since 2019. These are 13
supposed to be annual reports. We are past the point of saying it will be here later in the year. It needs a date. We are restricted in how much we can scrutinise the strategy without those progress reports. What I would really like to ask for is a firm date on when we can expect that report?
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): It is a very fair point. The context for why we have not been able to produce that report recently is because of COVID and the impact that has had on the team in particular and our capacity. As you are also aware, there has been a considerable reprioritisation and refocusing of activity across the GLA as a whole in terms of the recovery programme. The update on the London Environment Strategy will be coming soon. Rather than give you a date right now, again if I can write to you with that. That would be probably the better way of handling it. But point well taken and happy to write to confirm a specific date by which that will be available in the near future.
Emma Best AM: I appreciate that, Elliot, but I do think that really to suggest that we have not had a progress report since 2019 when there are supposed to be annual reports, I do take the point, but to suggest in February it would be a few months and now to suggest you will come back to me later, we need something a little bit more finite than that in terms of dates. Are you promising us that we will have a progress report by the end of this year at least?
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): Absolutely.
Emma Best AM: Therefore the promise is that sometime this year, 2021, we will have a progress report to scrutinise?
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): Happy to do that and also happy to write once we have a firm date for that for the agenda.
Emma Best AM: I would just put on record quickly, not so much a question, but the point Assembly Member Bokhari made about interim targets was very well made. We would really welcome a target say something like 2023 to really see where we are and if we can meet that 2026 goal.
Léonie Cooper AM: Chair, can I suggest to follow up and that as a result of today’s meeting you write to the Deputy Mayor, who is not with us, and ask when that report is going to be with us because it is now more than two years since the last one? To nail it down in terms of getting a response, I think we should write. I appreciate that Elliot has volunteered, but I think we should formally write and ask for that because we did ask for it earlier on and it has still not arrived yet.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): No, thank you for that. It is really helpful and I am very happy to write to the Deputy Mayor.
Moving to section 3, 1.5 Compatible Climate Action Plan, I am going to start with Assembly Member Devenish.
Tony Devenish AM (Deputy Chairman): Thank you, Chair, and starting with Elliot, please. What work is happening and in which sectors in order to decarbonise London and help reach the aim of a net zero by 2030, please?
14
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): Maybe I will start off with the transport sector and then Peter might want to come in with some of the other work that is going on. In terms of transport decarbonisation, there are a couple of things which are worth bearing in mind, first of all the situation that we have in terms of public transport in London. We have a really effective tool to encourage people to use vehicles less and by investing in that public transport, we can switch that quite effectively, efficiently and quickly to zero emissions, in particular around the investment that we want to make in the bus fleet. Peter was also talking about the power purchase agreements (PPA), how we can [them] to further our objectives around renewables, for example. The transport system in London has a really powerful and important role to play, not just in terms of reducing emissions, but also being a driver of wider systemic change as well. In doing that, as we heard earlier with bus electrification, for example, we create new opportunities for green jobs across the UK.
A couple of the key things to highlight are the commitments that exist in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy around supporting a significant mode shift away from private car use towards walking, cycling and public transport with the objective that, by 2041, 80% of trips will be walked, cycled or using public transport. That in itself is going to be absolutely vital in terms of contributing not just to our carbon objectives, but also to some of the further work that we need to do, particularly on things like air quality and reducing particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter (PM2.5) emissions in London.
It is really important that we lead by example, which is why bus electrification is so important. It is a great opportunity for the UK in terms of the manufacturing base and also by working, as I was explaining earlier, with the operators, what we are trying to do is bring forward the current committed date of 2037 by which the entire bus fleet will be zero emission. As many of you will already know, we already have around 500 zero emission buses in the fleet. We have a further 400 on order that will be joining the fleet very soon and that will result in at least 10% of the fleet being zero emission already. This feels like a very tangible objective and one which will again really set a global standard about what we are trying to achieve in terms of emissions from the transport system in London.
Finally, of course, we do recognise even with mode shift and even with a zero emission public transport fleet people will still need to use private vehicles. It is absolutely vital that we continue to support the electrification of those, including by investing in our electric vehicle charging infrastructure. Again, following on from the work that we did as part of the Mayor’s Electric Vehicle [Infrastructure] Taskforce, there is now ongoing work to try to work with the private sector in terms of delivering further charging points across London. That includes using GLA land in what we hope will be quite an innovative approach to make sure that we get the charging infrastructure that we need to support that wider transport revolution towards zero emission vehicles.
Peter, do you have anything to add?
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): Yes. We have talked about planning already, that we have the planning and development powers and the zero emission carbon requirements for homes and new developments, which are in place. I have mentioned driving is 41% ahead of national building regulations. Also importantly, where developments are unable to deliver that zero carbon commitment on site, they are currently paying then into offset funds, which the boroughs can access to drive more work around driving down carbon as well. There are about £90 million of offset payments which have been made, which are already supporting further work in the boroughs as well.
15
The two key areas I would point to are around retrofit and there are a range of retrofit programmes I have talked about already. We have our retrofit accelerators for workplaces, which are supporting decarbonisation of public and municipal buildings in the capital. We have our Warmer Homes Programme, which is supporting the retrofit of homes, particularly fuel-poor homes, in London. The Mayor announced recently the Innovation Partnership alongside the Centre of Excellence, which is focused on social housing and driving deep retrofit in that sector. We currently have seven London boroughs who we are working with through that particular Programme, who have committed already this year 2,000 homes to that Programme. In terms of renewables and heat, we have the £6 million Local Energy Accelerator Programme, which is providing technical support to both the private and public sector in bringing forward programmes for zero carbon and low carbon heat and renewables in London. We have the Solar Together London Programme, which we have just run the fourth version of, and just under 3,000 London homeowners have committed to install solar photovoltaics (PV) through that Programme this year. We have the London Community Energy Fund where we are supporting both development of projects and also funding the delivery of projects for the first time this year, and it is something I know the London Assembly recommended in its report to us early last year around the climate emergency. We are also working then through the Green New Deal Fund to accelerate the uptake of solar on industrial rooves, so working with the Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation (OPDC) on a model which we are hoping to replicate, which basically will install solar PV on industrial estates in the Old Oak area. There are few examples of the areas we are currently focused on.
Tony Devenish AM (Deputy Chairman): Thank you. Elliot also mentioned jobs. The Mayor always talks about “green jobs”. When you do write to the Committee, could you also break down where they are going to come from and how many there will be in total? That would be really, really helpful. I will hand back to the Chair.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Thank you very much. Assembly Member Bokhari.
Hina Bokhari AM: Thank you so much. This is for Peter and Elliot. You have touched on this already, about the need to improve London’s air quality and we need to do better. You have acknowledged that it needs to be a bit faster than it is at the moment and the Mayor is doing what he can to improve the quality of the air. Again, we could do better and I think you would agree with that. We need to move faster. Do you think the air monitoring arrangements are generally satisfactory in London? Are 100 permanent air monitors really enough to properly assess the situation across the whole of London?
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): That's the London Air Quality [monitoring] Network (LAQN), which is what I was talking about earlier that we developed in partnership first with King’s [College London] and now with Imperial [College London]. It is probably one of the advanced networks of its type of any city in the world and we are absolutely very lucky to have it. It is probably worth just saying that we do complement the monitoring at those specific locations with modelling, which we verify against what we have actually seen in the real world to check it is right. Then what that does is that gives us a very good understanding across the whole city in terms of pollution levels.
You are right and we absolutely want to build on that great legacy we have with the LAQN, which is part of the reason we have been working with a range of partners to deliver Breathe London. We managed to secure, working with C40, philanthropic funding to establish the network, which we are now continuing to develop. Whereas a reference quality monitoring network used as part of the 100 monitors that you were talking about is a very expensive piece of kit with very high maintenance costs, what we have been doing is there have been such brilliant advances in the technology in terms of how you monitor air quality, we can now have much smaller, cheaper sensors. What we wanted to do was to trial those and test those to see if they could be a 16
really nice complement to those reference quality monitoring stations that we have. That is why we started to roll those out at many more locations, including at schools and hospitals, really sensitive sites, where people want to understand what the air means for them, for their children or for a family member who might be in hospital. Over time, we want to build that network up so that we have many, many, many more sites and that will also help us in terms of evaluating the impact of many of our policies.
Perhaps a last point, which we think is very exciting and part of the reason C40 was involved, is that many other cities across the world do not have the resources to fund or support a reference quality monitoring network like the ones we developed with Imperial. A cheaper network based on the sensors is within reach. You were making the point earlier, which is a real point, that you need data to monitor performance. Saying it is going great is not enough; you need to be able to see the evidence. For many cities, having that kind of monitoring will be a really important mechanism for driving further action. Then when you think about the co- benefits between air quality and climate change, that means that particularly when it comes to our shared objectives around addressing the climate emergency, we are going to see much more action across cities around the world, which we think is really exciting.
Hina Bokhari AM: Thank you very much and I am glad to see you at least acknowledge that we do need to do more.
I am going to ask Farhana and maybe Peter and Elliot can come into this as well, the fact that we have these targets, they are quite challenging targets and we must meet them. Do you think it is necessary that the Mayor could have some new powers? What new powers do you think the Mayor might need to accelerate these London goals?
Farhana Yamin (Adviser, Climate Vulnerable Forum, and Associate Fellow, Chatham House): In general, especially in the UK, the fit between local authority cities and national legislation is poor and the mayors and local government have not been given sufficient powers to tackle all of the emissions that are within their mandates to do. In fact, there is a very important conference this afternoon, organised by UK100, which has a brilliant paper that tells what all these powers are that are missing and that should really be legislated for. There has been a lot of work examining how better governance could be worked out. I refer Members to, it is called, Shifting Power. The UK, again in its leadership as COP26 host, could put that right. There is nothing to stop the UK doing that, it does not have to wait for any other country, there is no unfair competitive advantage and we are not regulating an international problem here. This is just the lack of joined up thinking and it would mean that that one-third of emissions that cities have can be tackled much, much better.
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): If I could add onto the point about powers because I think Farhana made such a good point there. If you look at something like the Environment Bill, which is legislation currently going through Parliament, it misses out the vital strategic role of metro mayors, for example, including the GLA structure that we have with a citywide Mayor. That speaks to that disconnect. Many parts of Government are still catching up with the fact that you have had these changes at the regional level and that regions have a really important role to play in tackling some of these problems.
In terms of specifics, you might notice that I often talk about transport and that is because as well as the Interim Assistant Director (AD) role, I am responsible for air quality but also for transport decarbonisation because that is where there is such a strong mayoral influence and power framework. What we need is to be able to take the same kind of approach over non-transport sources of pollution. A good example is around 17
construction emissions, which are around 10 to 15% of our PM2.5 emissions, and we need to tackle those if we are going to achieve World Health Organization (WHO) recommended guidelines. We have done a lot in partnership with the boroughs and we have used our planning powers in an innovative way, but what we would like is the same kind of LEZ powers that we have over road vehicles over construction. If we had that, we could make a much more effective, lower cost, lower regulation system, which would help us achieve what we want to in terms of PM2.5. We are investing quite a lot of work with Government to try to make the case for that and they talk about the options of secondary legislation once the Environment Bill is passed.
Hina Bokhari AM: I am really pleased that you are talking about the joined up thinking that we need with the Government. How is central government supporting London’s net zero path? Can you give me some more information on that?
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): I will probably touch on – for partly the reason I was just saying - some of the really strong linkages on the air quality and climate side. The Mayor is very engaged with Government and we are working hard to build bridges with them. There is a recognition on both sides in terms of national climate objectives but also in terms of meeting national legal requirements in terms of local air quality that we need to work together. It is really important that we get the right support from Government and this is why we continue to make the case, for example, about additional funding, for example, around bus electrification. In some places, it is not about money, which we appreciate is always a sensitive topic, but actually just about the ability to take action and in recognition that cities - not just London but across the country - might be willing to go at a different pace than a national piece of legislation. As Farhana was saying, at UK100 today that is what the discussion is about. It is a cross-political approach to getting the right powers for the metro mayors, for the regions and for cities to take action to tackle both air pollution and climate and also to make progress in other key areas of the environment.
Hina Bokhari AM: Thank you very much. I am going to move on to ULEZ. I would like to know whether you think it has been successful. What other measures can the city perhaps implement to improve the air quality? Also, what does your modelling suggest about the impact of expanding ULEZ?
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): I think ULEZ has been very effective and what is particularly interesting is that that is also what the academic community is saying as well. [Dr] Gary Fuller, who is one of the leading experts in terms of monitoring London’s air quality at Imperial [College London], said that he has never seen a reduction at this speed and of this size in terms of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) pollution. That talks to the impact that ULEZ has had in central
London where we have seen since 2017 that 44% reduction in roadside NO2 concentrations.
What is really exciting about ULEZ is it has not just been about the emissions reduction. There has also been - and we talked earlier about it - the importance of changing behaviour as well as part of this. You have seen up to a 9% reduction in traffic as well as a result of the ULEZ. I know that many residents and other people have had concerns about potential negative impacts on the boundary, but we have seen improvements around the boundary as well, which is what we would expect to see because people do not just drive in the zone. The way that a city works is people want to get from A to B, they are driving across the boundaries of the zone and as a result you get really big spill over benefits. That is one of the things that we are hoping to see with the expansion of the ULEZ. We have already tightened standards for the LEZ, which covers the whole of London’s heavy vehicles, so for buses, coaches and lorries. As you know, in October this year we will then be expanding ULEZ up to the North/South Circulars and we expect that those additional interventions will result in a 30%
18
reduction in nitrous oxide (NOx) emissions, which is considerable and will help spread those benefits that we have seen in central London across the city as a whole.
As you were saying, quite rightly, there are still significant health impacts from air pollution in London. There has been progress, but there is much more that needs to be done, which is part of the reason the Mayor has committed to introducing the ULEZ and expanding it. We also need to take further action, which will have the climate dividend as well in terms of reducing emissions from the bus fleet and the taxi fleet. As I was explaining earlier, there is investment that we need to do in terms of facilitating electrification of the vehicle fleet as a whole but then working beyond that to tackle some of the non-transport sources as well where we are going to need those additional powers and that partnership approach with Government.
Hina Bokhari AM: I would like to come back to you about TfL in a moment. Farhana, do you support some of the views about ULEZ that were mentioned here just now? Do you think that we could do better to improve air quality other than just ULEZ?
Farhana Yamin (Adviser, Climate Vulnerable Forum, and Associate Fellow, Chatham House): Absolutely. I totally agree, but looking at the longer arc, there is often resistance and there is often uncertainty as people get used to things like ULEZ. Really, I want to introduce a concept of climate justice to the Committee. What that involves is essentially making sure that those who are most vulnerable, those who are bearing the impacts, the worst impacts, are not further impacted and in fact they are benefited. In terms of the broader direction of climate policy, what we must move to is making sure that all of these amazing, positive changes that are being undertaken are seen through that lens, seen through the lens of those who are already bearing the impacts. Often, communities in London [with] worsening air pollution [are] areas which are deprived, where the respiratory and health problems of our BAME communities are worse and where often there are schools involved. We have to pay greater attention to the equity dimension, the fairness dimension, to those who are not really benefiting from car or diesel-based transport. That is the one thing that I would flag and this is something that cuts across all of these policies. We have to have a much greater sensitivity to the fairness impacts and especially protect, promote and put at the very centre those who are already impacted in other ways from poverty, deprivation and air pollution and that all goes together. I would apply that, especially in the case of ULEZ, expanding it and making sure that those burdens are lifted first and foremost from those residents of London.
Hina Bokhari AM: Thank you so much, Farhana, for mentioning that particular community and that group. I would like you to pick up on that and also there is evidence that red routes, for example, where a lot of these communities are living are TfL-controlled roads. Is there more that the Mayor can be doing to tackle the air pollution in those particular areas?
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): I totally agree with what Farhana was just saying. It is a really powerful point, not just around climate justice generally, but also the real experience of air pollution in London is very unequal. Those living in the most deprived parts of London, the analysis that we did back in 2016 showed, were exposed to around a quarter more pollution than those living in the wealthiest parts of London. There is a real social justice dimension to taking further action on air quality and that is why it is so important, as you are saying.
What Farhana was saying was also really interesting around car ownership in London. If you look at somewhere like inner London, for example, around 60% of people do not own a car and yet the contribution, the overwhelming contribution, to the poor air quality in that area, as Farhana was saying, was from road transport, including diesel vehicles. That again talks to some of the work that we need to do and why the 19
mode shift target I was talking about - not just the ULEZ but also how you encourage people to use public transport, how you make walking and cycling more attractive and easier - and all of these things are a really important part of the mix as to how you improve air quality. One of the things that is probably important to mention in recognising the potential impact on some communities in London is of course the Mayor has put in place a scrappage scheme for those on low income and with disabilities. That has been an important part of the ULEZ to help people to meet those standards and to switch to either a cleaner mode of transport or to a cleaner vehicle.
Hina Bokhari AM: What are you specifically doing about red routes?
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): On red routes, there is a whole range of work that is taking place there. I talked specifically earlier around what we want to do further in terms of bus electrification. Many of the bus routes that we had worked on, if you go back to the low emission bus zones, were one of the major arteries coming out of central London into inner London and beyond. The work that we have done with the low emission bus zones was really important in terms of improving air quality.
To give you one example, which Léonie [Cooper AM] will know well in terms of Putney High Street, what you ended up seeing was a 97% plus reduction in the number of hourly exceedances there thanks to the targeted interventions that we were able to do. More generally, the way that you tackle pollution in terms of the red routes is also part of that systemic approach I was talking about. It is about mode shift and it is about trying to get people out of vehicles and to reduce the overall amount of traffic. It is also, where needed, taking targeted local action to address specific hot spots, particularly if there is a school maybe at a sensitive location. It is that package of measures, which is how you can improve air quality, particularly on those red routes where, as you were rightly highlighting, potentially more deprived Londoners might live.
Hina Bokhari AM: Thank you so much. I do have one very quick question and I hope you will not mind. Is there enough being done to monitor particulate matter pollution in particular? There appears, for example, to be hardly any monitoring of particulate matter pollution on the approach ways to the proposed Silvertown Tunnel--
Léonie Cooper AM: Sorry, Chair, but particulate matter has got nothing to do with COP26, which was the apparent title of this meeting and you did rather cut short my questioning earlier on. Assembly Member Bokhari seems to have had about half an hour now. Can we move on to something that is relevant to the topic?
Hina Bokhari AM: I did ask the Chair if I could ask that additional question.
Léonie Cooper AM: It has nothing to do with the topic for today.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Sorry, Assembly Member Cooper. Particulate matter is mentioned in the briefing because, of course, part of the COP26 is to look at air pollution.
Léonie Cooper AM: It might be mentioned in the briefing, but it has got nothing to do with greenhouse gases. Particulate matter is not the same as greenhouse gases and I am sure you know that.
Hina Bokhari AM: I am just talking about sharing data. I know that the team out here has been working very hard on that. 20
Léonie Cooper AM: Are we talking about COP26 today or are we talking about air pollution?
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): COP26 covers air pollution and I am going to allow the question, but thank you for your intervention. Assembly Member Bokhari?
Léonie Cooper AM: But I really do not see how particulate matter is relevant to this meeting. You have given it a very misleading title if I may say, Chair. It has got nothing to do with COP26 at all.
Hina Bokhari AM: I am very keen to hear more about your data collection, as we have mentioned before.
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority):
In terms of PM2.5, there are additional PM2.5 stations being added to the LAQN. However, the main mechanism, with which I think we will be able to improve our ability to monitor PM2.5, is around how we use the Breathe London network. It is a good point; I am a big fan of always having more data and you are right to highlight PM2.5 as a particular health challenge. I am sure the Committee will know as much as I the very important outcome that we saw shortly before Christmas in terms of the inquest into the death of Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah. It is a very important reminder that we need to redouble our efforts, continue to take action and to identify further steps that we can take to improve air quality, which we will do.
To link it back to COP, this absolutely all then links in terms of the work that we are trying to do on climate and that is really important. One of the key messages that hopefully we can get across at COP is around the health dimension of tackling climate, the climate justice dimension that Farhana was talking about, and then by doing that deliver real, tangible benefits to Londoners as quickly as possible.
Hina Bokhari AM: Thank you. I really appreciate the fact that you were just so open and honest today and this is the way we need to collaborate and work together because together we can solve the issues of the day that we have. Thank you very much.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Thank you, Assembly Member Bokhari. I am going to come to Assembly Member Best.
Emma Best AM: Thank you.
I wanted to ask, I think Elliot, ahead of the ULEZ expansion, do you recognise the differences in the existing zone to the expanded zone, which will be 18 times bigger and go into some areas where there are very, very low ratings [of Public Transport Access Level (PTAL)], for example. Where I live in Chingford, there are no direct bus routes to the local hospital and it is a challenge for people to get about. How are you going to make sure that we cannot detach people from London or from their local amenities like hospitals and charge them for doing so and, in doing so, allow them to keep polluting, but they are being charged for it, and make sure that the vehicles are changed? Do we need to put more money in the scrappage scheme?
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): That kind of question probably is not for me as an officer. To respond to some of the other points, I do take the point that central London and inner London are different. However, it is worth bearing in mind that there are still high levels of pollution in inner London, which is part of the reason expansion is an important part of our legal obligation to improve air quality and to reach legal compliance by 2025. There will also be those spill over benefits, which will help other parts of London as well. In the design of the scheme, we did take into account, particularly in outer London, and there was discussion about whether we should expand ULEZ up to 21
basically the same boundary as the LEZ. We tried to take the most proportionate approach that we could to make sure that we are as impactful as possible in terms of air pollution but not putting unneeded burdens on to Londoners. It is worth bearing in mind, as I think you will know, that we are seeing a very high compliance rate at the moment. Already, about 80% of cars are compliant with the ULEZ standards and, as I was explaining, the scrappage scheme that has been available does provide targeted help, particularly to those on low incomes and disabled people.
They are very, very important points that you raise. Where there are specific issues that affect particular groups, for example around the National Health Service (NHS), we tried to consider what we can do further in terms of NHS reimbursements. It is also really important that we take the right action that improves air quality, fulfils the moral and legal duties that we have to achieve legal compliance as well as then, as you were just saying on PM2.5, going further to meet the WHO recommended guidelines.
Emma Best AM: Thank you. Just if I may, one more question is around the low traffic neighbourhoods (LTN). What do you think the impact has been on air quality? Do you think that every LTN has positively affected air quality?
Léonie Cooper AM: Chair, this is not a matter for City Hall scrutiny. The LTNs were paid for by the Conservative Government and installed by councils across London. Only the streetspace scheme is relevant to the scrutiny of the Assembly on the Mayor. If we want to scrutinise London councils and individual councils for the installations that they made called LTNs, then we should really have invited somebody here from London Councils. I really do not think the Mayor’s officials should answer on installations that they had absolutely no control over at all. For example, in my boroughs of Merton and Wandsworth, Merton Council designed all the LTNs in Merton. If I have comments on them, I contact Merton Council and the same in Wandsworth, although it is very hard to comment on theirs because they took them all out after three weeks. That was the decision of the council to install and the decision is the council’s where they have decided to take them out. I do not understand why Assembly Member Best is asking --
Emma Best AM: Chair, with all due respect, you are the Chair of this meeting and --
Léonie Cooper AM: It is ridiculous.
Emma Best AM: -- Elliot, I am sure, can speak for himself. If he does not want to answer the question or does not think he is the right person to, I am pretty sure he is confident to say, “Not for me, Governor”. I think Elliot can answer that.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Elliot, I do not want to stifle any debate about air pollution. I would ask you to be brief though and the answer to be brief, more because of time than anything.
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): LTNs is an area where evidence is being collected and, I think as you know, many LTNs were introduced quite quickly. We definitely have seen that where LTNs have been in place or the equivalent of LTNs, like some of the work that has happened at Waltham Forest, for example, there have been some really positive effects of LTNs. It is important - and Léonie [Cooper AM] is right, of course - that they are being introduced by local authorities. We would expect local authorities to be working with their local communities and to be listening to them and that if there are any unintended impacts, they are being responded to. In general, I think an LTN, designed in the correct way and working with the local community, can be a very powerful additional tool to support behaviour change and to help reduce emissions. 22
Emma Best AM: How can we better work with local authorities to make sure that they do implement successful LTNs?
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): This one is slightly out of my purview, but I have colleagues at TfL who I know put in quite a lot of work with local authorities, especially as we are now looking at how those LTNs can be improved and if any further changes are needed. That collaborative work is really important and needs to be encouraged as much as possible.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): We are going to move to the last section then, which is the climate emergency report. Many Londoners will have been affected in their journeys yesterday. This is pretty timely with the floods going on at stations whether it was Sloane Square, Maida Vale or Raynes Park. What we really want to know is what progress has the Mayor made - and this is for you, Peter - with the nine recommendations set out in the April 2020 Environment Committee report, The Climate Emergency: Extreme Weather and Emissions?
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): That is a very big question because they are very large recommendations. I did provide an update in October [2020] on how we were taking that forward and I would be happy to provide a more detailed answer on all of the recommendations. In reference to what happened yesterday, the flooding, the reality is that this really strikes home the importance of taking action on climate. We are going to see more and more of this with greater frequency and greater intensity. It really does highlight the importance then of investing in sustainable urban drainage [systems, SuDS] and managing the public realm in a way which allows it to cope with large levels of surface water flooding, alongside strong policies in the London Plan.
There are a number of things we have put in place recently that start to deliver or certainly build on what we have to date. The Mayor recently announced Green New Deal climate resilience measures and a Grow Back Greener Programme as well. That is £8 million of interventions, both at the community and the strategic level, which are looking to green the grey, so reduce those hard surfaces and make more of the natural environment in tackling some of these challenges. We also have the Future Neighbourhoods 2030 Programme. Again linking back to the issue of climate justice, that is particularly focused then on looking to support the most vulnerable parts of London. We have asked boroughs to come forward with programmes in areas which have the greatest risk of flooding and overheating, for example, and the greatest areas of deprivation.
The key thing is going to be unlocking Government funding for SuDS, which is at the moment extremely difficult. I am very pleased to say that the London Strategic SuDS Pilot [Study] won first prize at - I am sure none of you has ever heard of this - the National Flooding Coastal Awards a couple of weeks ago. I do not think it is quite the Oscars, but nevertheless it is important recognition of some really great work, which has demonstrated the importance of small scale interventions in the right places and the aggregate impact they can have on surface water flooding. The challenge to date has been in making the case to these big pots of funding of these small interventions and it is really important that we find ways to get those mechanisms to work. By doing that, we have managed to unlock about £1 million of flood risk levy funding to date to do that and we are looking to build on that and think about how we can access greater funding through the Flood Defence Grant [in Aid] as well.
I am happy to talk about the other areas as well. I wonder if there are particular areas you want to --
23
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Just to check, is there a commitment to write to the Committee with each of the nine recommendations and what progress the Mayors made?
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): I would be happy to. Some of them are completed and some of the areas have been challenging in the last year due to COVID, not least in terms of retrofit. There have been impacts then in terms of getting into homes for very obvious reasons, impacts in terms of the supply chains and very demanding delivery timeframes set by Government grants, too. I would be happy to pick up on the details of that.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): I appreciate it is a big question.
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): Yes, indeed.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Congratulations on the award. A win is a win.
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): Thanks.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): I am going to hand over to Assembly Member Sheikh and then, I believe, Assembly Member McCartney has a follow-up on the back of it.
Sakina Sheikh AM: The question that I was hoping to ask has broadly been covered by you, Peter, which is essentially what are the challenges the Mayor is facing when implementing the recommendations of the report? I know that you are going to be writing to the Committee with the progress and more information on the challenges. If there was anything you wanted to add, I would invite you to do so now. One of the follow- ups I wanted to ask is as much as the challenges, there are also the opportunities. We have spoken about this a little bit already in the Committee around the Green New Deal and the opportunity that that has created to give us a social justice lens, discussing some of our climate issues. Hence the term rather than "climate action", we talk about "climate justice", integrating social justice in our analysis of solutions on our climate action. I wanted to integrate that if there were any other challenges you wanted to home in on but also the opportunity the Green New Deal presents in terms of using social justice as a lens through which we can create solutions that benefit all Londoners.
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): Thank you very much. I would maybe just highlight two particular areas of challenge at the moment in the report. One is around retrofit. I have mentioned the positive engagement we have had with Government and we have seen more and more funding supporting retrofit coming to London, but there are still some fundamental challenges that we face as a city in unlocking things like the Energy Company Obligation (ECO). If London had a fair share of that national portion, that is about £130 million. We currently get about £30 million a year and without that sort of significant increase in access to that fund and the ability to shape how that is spent in the context of London, delivering in London is different than delivering, say, in a town like Milton Keynes, then that remains a particular challenge.
Sakina Sheikh AM: No disrespect to the people of Milton Keynes.
24
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): No, no disrespect at all, just a slightly different sort of building stock to deal with than we have in London. There is a range of other things that need to happen around retrofit. Just looking at the recommendations made by the Committee, which largely are well in line with things we were already arguing for through the London Environment Strategy, the enforcement of a minimum energy efficiency standard is really, really important and unlocking the ability of local authorities to do that, providing the resources to enable them to do is particularly important as well. There are a number of things around Value Added Tax (VAT), which are challenging in terms of delivery as well. There are a number of things to be grappled with where we still need to see doors unlocked and greater commitment.
The other area I would just highlight where we have made good progress ourselves, but are not really seeing a great deal of support from Government at the moment, is around community energy programmes. We have continued to support those in London, despite the urban community energy projects programme being stopped by Government. That is really important in terms of that point around engaging citizens and people locally. We talked about it earlier, community energy projects, and again we talked about the Grow Back Greener scheme, which is really focused on communities and engaging communities in solutions that they drive and they take forward is extremely important. I would be very keen to see Government do more to support community energy projects going forward as well.
Turning to the Green New Deal and the equity point, it is clearly extremely important. The climate emergency and social justice do go hand in hand, both in the city and globally, and we are taking that forward. Leaving aside the air quality examples for a second, just to give you another example of how we are thinking that through at the moment, we produced in March [2021] with Bloomberg Associates a Climate Vulnerability Map for London, which took some of those environmental challenges we face - air quality, overheating, flooding, access to green space. It mapped that then against social vulnerabilities, things like age, ethnicity, other challenges around income levels, for example, to allow us to really identify where our focus needs to be and where our funds are best spent. With our flagship programme is coming out this year, the Future Neighbourhoods 2030 Programme, for example, or our Climate Resilience Programme, which we have just launched, we are looking for boroughs and others to identify projects in those areas, the areas most at need, so we prioritise communities who typically are most vulnerable and do not always get the best share of projects and programmes for London. That is a good practical example of how we are thinking the Green New Deal and the social justice angle.
Sakina Sheikh AM: Fantastic, thank you. I am going to go away and have a look at that map in some detail.
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): Great.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Thank you. To follow-up on that, you have given us examples of where central government has not been particularly supportive, like community energy. Are there areas where the Government is providing support and could you give us some examples of places where it is supporting and places where it is not? That extends from what you have just said. Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): I think I have already mentioned it in terms of retrofit. It is certainly supporting and we are seeing it engaging more in terms of the immediate grants that are available to support. We have received about £160 million of grant funding for energy efficiency projects both across public sector buildings and homes coming directly into London from the Government Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS). That relationship is providing benefit to London. There is a more systemic set of challenges 25
that still need to be resolved. Again I mentioned the Centre of Excellence earlier as a good example of where Government is really engaged and identifying the benefits of what we have done and the opportunity to grow out from there. Another example would be the heat networks innovation funding, which typically cities and in particular London has had a good deal of success in accessing, which again built on much of the work which this organisation has done over 15 years in prioritising heat networks and providing access to funds to enable them to be built out. They are some good examples of where we are working together. We are supporting the Government through the Mayor's Advisory Council for COP26 as well. Again, we are looking to support wherever we can the Government in its ambition. It is a shared ambition certainly. I am sure all of us are here to take more action and get things moving in relation to climate so we continue to engage on a range of issues.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): We definitely need more action. On those areas where the Government is not supporting, what strategies are being used to lobby the Government and what concessions have been achieved?
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director, Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): Again, the key thing here is to see COP as an opportunity to get the voice heard of London and other cities. We have been working with a range of partners both internationally through UK100, who have been mentioned a number of times today, and also through our local partners, London councils, to get that message home about the importance of action in this area and the importance to unlock the opportunity and the potential of local authorities and the regional government.
The key strategy is to showcase the opportunity, to build that coalition. I called it the "willing" earlier. That is important. It is not just the London government making the point. This is a message which is not just being landed from other English metropolitan regions but local authorities across the country and other partners. That is key and integral to making progress in this area.
In terms of concessions, I have mentioned a number of areas there where we are yet to see more but there is an opportunity through both the net zero strategy, which is due to be with us before COP, and the heat and building decarbonisation strategy in particular, to see progress. We continue to discuss those at the officer level and also the political level in the organisation.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Thank you. Assembly Member McCartney.
Joanne McCartney AM: Thank you, Chair. A lot of my questions have already been answered. I was going to ask about retrofits. The Mayor does not have any direct levers in this regard. He is dependent on Government funds, and you have given us a brief overview about that. I notice in previous assessments you have done; it has been stated that London will need about £10 billion worth of funding if the Mayor is to achieve the target by 2050 that the vast majority of London's building stock will have been retrofitted.
On the strategies, are you working closely with local authorities in London, therefore jointly making the case to Government for the urgent need for further funding and further powers?
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director, Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): Thank you for that question and yes, we are. Much of the activity we are talking about today is being taken forward through the London Recovery Programme and the Green New Deal mission which we co-own with London councils. They are key partners. Absolutely, there is a focus in both our organisation and across London local authorities to drive home those messages around retrofit and to get 26
that ambition we both have across and the need for Government to support that. We are in discussions at the minute about how we use COP with London Councils as an opportunity to push that message home with Government. You will be hearing more on that in the next couple of months.
Joanne McCartney AM: Thank you. With regards to action on climate change, the last year has been appalling for most Londoners and across the world. It has obviously created some opportunities which we have seen with the Streetspace scheme about pushing forward some change more quickly. Have you found any other areas where the last year has given further opportunities that you are working on that you have not mentioned so far?
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director, Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): One of the important things that has certainly registered over the last year is the importance of green space to Londoners and Londoners have valued the opportunity to use that space. That would be a good example of where that message has come across very clearly and we have responded in terms of programmes and projects which we are looking to get underway to engage. That would be my primary example of areas in which the importance of the environment has come home.
The other one is around the green economy and its importance to London. The London environment sector is currently bigger than the construction sector and the manufacturing sector in terms of the economy and the economic value to London. We have recognised the importance to support that and grow that in terms of our climate commitments and delivering that. Also, in terms of creating growth in the comeback from the pandemic and that is an important area and getting that across in a way that is meaningful to Londoners. They can see the opportunity and they are able to access the opportunity which will be incredibly important over the next couple of years, even longer but certainly the next two years.
Joanne McCartney AM: One of the issues with the Green Home Grant was the lack of skilled people to carry out the work that was needed. I take it you are talking to the skills team here on a very close basis and trying to improve our job creation in those areas.
Peter Daw (Interim Assistant Director, Environment and Energy and Head of Climate Change, Greater London Authority): Absolutely. It is simplistic to see the Green New Deal is driving the demand in the sectors that we need to focus, and the good work mission is then focused on ensuring that the supply chain can meet that. We do talk regularly, and we are closely discussing what those needs are from both the priorities we need to drive forward and how they can meet that through the academies that the Mayor is planning through the adult education budget. Those are two examples.
We are also using our own programmes such as Solar Together London to grow the skill set of the solar community in London. As part of that programme, we are working with 100 solar installers to improve the training and skill set in things like battery storage and charging and in solar PV also. Those two things go hand in hand. If we grow the demand but we are unable to meet it, as you say, we end up in the same position we have been in the past where the sector is just unable to meet that demand.
Joanne McCartney AM: Thank you, Chair.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Thank you. Assembly Member Devenish.
Tony Devenish AM (Deputy Chair): One final comment. Most have now been covered and it has been a very illuminating session. Thank you very much for your time this morning. I am mentioning the sense of 27
urgency and particularly yesterday with the extreme weather and the flash floods. How much involvement do you have directly with Andy Byford [Commissioner of TfL] and the TfL senior leadership? Obviously, they have a network where a lot of it is underground and they were hit very badly, as were Londoners, yesterday. How can you use Andy and his communication skills and TfL to make sure that COP26 is incredibly successful?
Elliot Treharne (Interim Assistant Director for Environment and Energy, Greater London Authority): We work very closely with TfL. That starts at the officer level and something that has happened in the last couple of years is there has been a much greater focus within TfL about what additional action they can do building on the excellent work they have done on air quality, around adaption and climate change. It fair to say that Andy coming has been a personal priority. I am sure you do not get to see all the internal TfL staff videos, but he has done a number of them where he talks about climate change and about the importance of further action. He is a personal advocate.
As you will have seen as part of the stability plan of TfL, one of the proposals that was built into that was to work with the grain, to work with Government to demonstrate how TfL could play a critical role in helping deliver against climate ambitions in both terms of mitigation but also recognising that we need to prepare our city for the aspects of climate change which we cannot fully mitigate. Andy is keen to be and will continue to be a very powerful advocate for that. I am sure he will be using his voice in the run-up to COP, and we work closely with officers of TfL to make sure we leverage the full range of potential options that we have with TfL to promote some of London's leadership in this space and some of the areas where we can help Government make a huge success out of COP which we want it to be.
Tony Devenish AM (Deputy Chair): Thank you, Chair.
Zack Polanski AM (Chair): Thank you very much and that ends our question and answer session.
28