We are in for several months on the hustings listening to a variety of different political views as to what might, or might not, make London, and each mayoral candidate, attractive to the electorate over the next few years.
The challenge is to determine which candidate can most effectively articulate his plans in a way that engenders interest and passion.
Although I was not born in London, I regard myself as a Londoner, having moved here in 1983. It is with this experience that I believe the real focus of our next mayor must be to keep London, London. It’s a balancing act, and a fine one at that.
London has for many centuries been a global trading post and while the products and services have changed over the years, the importance and relevance of London as a global city has not. It has reinvented itself time and again, thus far very successfully.
Perhaps the pressure now is greater than it ever has been to ensure London is at the top of its game while protecting the capital from dangers, foreign and domestic.
It would be simply inconceivable to consider London excluding itself from the global arena. The city’s position on the global stage is a function of its people, history, business platform, language, culture, time zone, transparency and reputation. These things must be protected while at the same time London maintains its international reputation and attractiveness.
Given the capital’s need to evolve and keep up, added to the massive increase forecast in its population, the new mayor’s agenda must focus on the following.
λ Housing, housing, housing. Provision of housing for all Londoners, and quickly. A massive subject, much debated, yet to be resolved – the greatest priority of all.
λ Infrastructure. Crossrail is nearly here; Crossrail 2 must follow quickly. The debate over airport expansion has to be resolved swiftly – on this subject we must be the laughing stock of Europe, if not the world.
λ Public land. It must be more freely available since this is the one estate that offers a real prospect of scale. Is it too much to ask for a greater London public land register?
λ Planning must be quicker. As we are about to find out, when end sales of any real estate product falters, supply quickly dwindles because, despite popular opinion, development risk is, as we know, enormous. The often ridiculously slow pace of planning magnifies this risk, and constrains supply.
A cross-party plan
Isn’t it time, therefore, for a London Plan? Not a Ken Livingstone London Plan or a Boris Johnson London Plan, but a Londoner’s London Plan.
This isn’t some altruistic dream, but a practical observation that many of London’s key projects go beyond a term or several terms of office. We need a cross-party plan in which the principals are agreed on London’s planning, housing and development priorities well into the 21st century.
The London Assembly website says, regarding the issues for the current London plan review, “the course they intend to take will be known only after the election in May 2016”. London can’t wait and then wait again.
We must ensure London remains attractive to its international investors and occupiers since combined they are the lifeblood that brings economic stability to the city. However, if infrastructure or property supply is lacking, then the city will be threatened.
It goes without saying that the agenda for London must focus on protecting and promoting the capital’s greatest assets. These are its culture, its fabulous buildings, its open spaces and parks, the River Thames, black cabs and more. It is these elements of London that must be protected because they help create its buzz and individuality.
If we do not protect these things, we are in danger of turning London into a clinical transit lounge that more resembles Terminal 5 than the welcoming and characterful hub that it has been, and must remain.
Alistair Elliott is senior partner at Knight Frank
