logo
London councils yet to spend £130m in local climate funds

London councils yet to spend £130m in local climate funds

The Guardian26-04-2025

London councils are sitting on more than £130m that should be funding local climate action, the Guardian can reveal.
More than £170m has been collected through the mayor of London's carbon offset fund, which developers are required to pay into to mitigate emissions from new projects, since it was introduced in 2016. However, the capital's 33 local authorities have spent less than £40m between them. Some have said they do not have the resources, expertise or time to decide how to spend it.
The money gathered from this fund must be spent on carbon reduction measures in local areas. These include energy efficiency improvements to council housing and other buildings that would lower energy bills for tenants, as well as renewable energy projects and district heating schemes. The cash can also be given out as community grants, and some councils have used it to fund education projects, tree planting and community food-growing schemes.
The data, obtained through freedom of information requests, shows a wide variation in spending by councils up to the end of last year. Some authorities have spent all of the funding they have collected from developers while others have spent none. The vast majority have spent less than 20% of the cash.
The Guardian was told by a number of councils that some of their unspent cash – about £15m in total – had been allocated for projects but not yet spent. Meanwhile, Greater London Authority figures show councils have at least another £150m on the way from developers.
Zack Polanski, the deputy leader of the Green party and chair of the London assembly's environment committee, said progress had been 'unacceptably slow and inconsistent'.
'Thousands of Londoners are stuck in cold, damp and mouldy homes while their bills keep climbing,' he said. 'It's unbelievable that despite having the funds available to fix this, councils are sitting on the money year after year, leaving the most vulnerable to suffer.'
Polanski said the situation 'reeks of complacency' and he blamed the London mayor, Sadiq Khan, for a failure to deliver a clear net zero plan.
Tower Hamlets (£20m), Islington (£18.5m) and Westminster (£16.1m) councils have received the most offsetting cash from developers. Tower Hamlets has spent just over a quarter at £5.3m and Westminster has spent £2.4m – about 15%. Both say they have significantly more cash allocated for projects. Islington has spent £12.1m, the most of any London borough by some distance and about 65% of its pot.
Isaac Beevor, a partnerships director at Climate Emergency UK, which monitors the climate action of councils across the country, said Khan needed to 'get a grip' on his policy to achieve his target of a net zero London by 2030.
'This money could have been spent on retrofitting council homes, planting trees and greening our boroughs, or supporting community energy,' he said. 'Some councils have utilised the fund, so there is no valid excuse for those who have spent the last decade refusing to spend a huge pile of cash destined for climate action. We would expect all London boroughs to be ramping up their climate action by spending this money.'
He added: 'This situation highlights flaws in these schemes: if funds aren't spent, emissions from new developments have not been offset.'
A City Hall spokesperson told the Guardian 'urgent talks' were taking place with councils about speeding up the delivery of projects. They said the amount of money collected and spent by councils had been increasing year on year, but added: 'A key challenge is the pipeline of deliverable projects available for funding.'
London Councils, an umbrella group representing the capital's boroughs, said there were 'undoubtedly challenges to overcome' and pointed out that Khan's recommended price of £95 for each tonne of carbon dioxide emitted had been devalued since it was set in 2021.
Sign up to Down to Earth
The planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essential
after newsletter promotion
'Boroughs find that carbon offset funds often fail to cover the cost of the projects needed to mitigate operational emissions generated by new development,' a spokesperson said. Councils told the Greater London Authority last year that as well as lacking the required funding, they did not have the time, expertise or resources needed to get projects off the ground.
London Councils has now launched a series of workshops to advise boroughs on how to spend the money.
The majority of London councils charge developers the recommended £95/tonne CO2, but this is only a guide. As of last year, three Labour-run councils have started charging developers more – not with the aim of raising more cash, but to discourage offsetting, which the Climate Change Committee says 'should not be relied on' to decarbonise buildings.
Another 15 councils are said to be looking into raising offsetting costs. Beevor has urged all councils to do this, saying it will encourage developers to hit net zero emissions on-site and remove the need for mitigation projects altogether.
Merton council, which in 2003 introduced the pioneering 'Merton rule' requiring new developments to generate 10% of their energy from renewables, now charges developers £300 per tonne of CO2. Lewisham has set a new price of £104, while Westminster now charges £330 for electric-based schemes and £880 for gas-based schemes.
Haringey council in February allocated all of its outstanding carbon offset funding to projects including the Haringey Community Carbon Fund, which awards grants to community-led decarbonisation projects such as solar panel schemes, upcycling wood workshops, school uniform swaps and football boot recycling.
Of London's 33 local authorities, 28 declared a climate emergency in 2019 or 2020, announcing bold net zero targets and sweeping commitments to cut private vehicle use, divest pension funds from fossil fuel companies and improve energy efficiency of council housing.
Last year, the Local Government Association found two-thirds of councils were not confident of hitting the net zero targets, saying climate action was being 'strangled' by a complex web of hard-to-reach Whitehall funding pots.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The Guardian launches Missing in the Amazon, a new podcast that uncovers what happened when a journalist and an indigenous defender disappeared
The Guardian launches Missing in the Amazon, a new podcast that uncovers what happened when a journalist and an indigenous defender disappeared

The Guardian

timean hour ago

  • The Guardian

The Guardian launches Missing in the Amazon, a new podcast that uncovers what happened when a journalist and an indigenous defender disappeared

The Guardian today (Thursday 5 June) launched Missing in the Amazon, a new six-part podcast series uncovering the full, untold story of the disappearance of journalist Dom Phillips and indigenous defender Bruno Pereira. Missing in the Amazon is the series debut from The Guardian Investigates - the new home for the Guardian's award-winning narrative podcasts and all future investigative releases. Missing in the Amazon In 2022, the disappearance of Dom Phillips and Bruno Pereira shocked the world and exposed the corruption threatening the future of the Amazon. The series follows Guardian Latin America correspondent Tom Phillips, a friend and colleague of Dom, who joined the search for the two men, who had disappeared in one of the most remote corners of the Amazon jungle. Tom explores what happened to Dom and Bruno, and why - three years on - so many unanswered questions remain. Told through exclusive interviews, previously unheard testimonies and immersive on-the-ground reporting, the series delves into the complex intersection of organised crime, environmental destruction, and the fight to protect indigenous land. Blending investigative journalism with a personal search for the truth, find out what compelled two men to risk everything in one of the most dangerous regions in the world. The first two episodes of Missing in the Amazon are available for listening now, with subsequent episodes released every Monday. Listen wherever you get your podcasts. The Guardian Investigates A commitment to the Guardian's impactful investigative reporting in all formats, this brand new feed brings together the Guardian's most compelling audio journalism in one place. This will include the newly launched Missing in the Amazon, Black Box, a gripping exploration of AI's collision with humanity and the chart-topping and critically acclaimed Can I tell you a Secret?, which helped further expose a prolific cyberstalker and inspired the number one rated series on Netflix documentary series, based on original Guardian reporting. Tom Phillips, Guardian journalist and podcast host, Missing in the Amazon, said: 'Over the past three years we have made more than a half a dozen trips to the Brazilian Amazon to make this podcast, travelling thousands of miles through the jungle by helicopter, plane, boat and on foot to understand what happened to Dom and Bruno, and why. The podcast is a tribute to two brilliant and much-missed men: an intrepid reporter and a tenacious indigenous expert who, in their different ways, sought to defend Brazil's indigenous communities and the rainforests where they live. May we never forget Dom and Bruno and the causes they held dear.' Nicole Jackson, global head of audio, Guardian News & Media, said: 'Missing in the Amazon is about Dom and Bruno, who they were and the vital work that they were doing - told by the people who knew them best, many of whom are speaking for the first time. It's also the story of what Dom and Bruno cared so much about. The Amazon and the indigenous people who are trying to protect it. It's about their future and the future of the world's biggest rainforest - a story that should matter to every single one of us - our survival depends on it.' The Guardian Investigates, Missing in the Amazon series is available on the Guardian's recently updated mobile news app. The new podcasts tab is a key new feature, allowing for easier podcast discovery via the new in-app audio player. Download now on the App Store and Google Play. Missing in the Amazon is reported and hosted by Tom Phillips. The series was written by Tom Phillips and Joshua Kelly. The series producer is Joshua Kelly. The producers were Poppy Damon and Ana Ionova. The field producers were Leticia Leite and Ana Ionova. The development producer was Redzi Bernard. Sound design is by Simon Panyi and Pascal Wyse. The music supervisor is Pascal Wyse. Original music by Stela Nesrine. Additional tracks by Adam Bourke. The artwork is by Auá Mendes, her illustration is based on the last photograph taken of Dom and Bruno. The executive editor is Nicole Jackson, the Guardian's global head of audio. [ENDS] For more information, interviews or review copies please contact About Guardian Media Group Guardian Media Group is amongst the world's leading media organisations. Its core business is Guardian News & Media (GNM), publisher of one of the largest English-speaking quality news websites in the world. In the UK, Guardian Media Group publishes the Guardian newspaper six days a week, first published in 1821. Since launching its US and Australian digital editions in 2011 and 2013, respectively, traffic from outside of the UK now represents around two-thirds of the Guardian's total digital audience. The Guardian also has an international digital edition and a new European edition that launched in 2023, with an expanded network of more than 20 European correspondents, editors and reporters.

Harry and Meghan considered changing surname to Spencer
Harry and Meghan considered changing surname to Spencer

North Wales Chronicle

time17 hours ago

  • North Wales Chronicle

Harry and Meghan considered changing surname to Spencer

However, this plan was apparently shelved after the UK passports for Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet were issued almost six months after the initial applications. The passport application was apparantly delayed (Image: Dominic Lipinski/PA) A source claimed that the duke and duchess feared that UK officials were delaying the process because of the applications included HRH titles (His/Her Royal Highness) for both children. According to The Guardian, a source close to the Sussexes said: 'There was clear reluctance to issue passports for the kids." However, after three months without receiving the documents because of "technical issues," it is understood that Harry and Meghan reapplied using the 24-hour passport service, only for their meeting to be cancelled because of a "systems failure". The source claimed: 'The king hadn't wanted Archie and Lili to carry the titles, most of all the HRH, and the British passports, once created, would be the first and perhaps the only legal proof of their names'. They added: "Harry was at a point where British passports for his children with their updated Sussex surnames (since the death of Queen Elizabeth II) were being blocked with a string of excuses over the course of five months. 'Out of sheer exasperation he went to his uncle to effectively say: 'My family are supposed to have the same name and they're stopping that from happening because the kids are legally HRH, so if push comes to shove, if this blows up and they won't let the kids be called Sussex, then can we use Spencer as a surname?'' It is understood that Prince Harry wants his children to have the HRH titles so that they can decide for themselves in the future if they want to be working royals. The standard wait time for a UK passport is within three weeks (Image: Phil Harris/Daily Mirror/PA Wire) Prince Harry says he doesn't know 'how much longer my father has' Prince Harry loses appeal on keeping level of police protection when in the UK According to the UK Government website, the standard wait time for a British Passport is within three weeks. However, this could take longer if more information is required or if applicants need to be interviewed. The turnaround time may also differ for those applying from another country. The application time starts when the Passport Office receives an applicant's documents.

Harry and Meghan considered changing surname to Spencer
Harry and Meghan considered changing surname to Spencer

Leader Live

time17 hours ago

  • Leader Live

Harry and Meghan considered changing surname to Spencer

However, this plan was apparently shelved after the UK passports for Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet were issued almost six months after the initial applications. The passport application was apparantly delayed (Image: Dominic Lipinski/PA) A source claimed that the duke and duchess feared that UK officials were delaying the process because of the applications included HRH titles (His/Her Royal Highness) for both children. According to The Guardian, a source close to the Sussexes said: 'There was clear reluctance to issue passports for the kids." However, after three months without receiving the documents because of "technical issues," it is understood that Harry and Meghan reapplied using the 24-hour passport service, only for their meeting to be cancelled because of a "systems failure". The source claimed: 'The king hadn't wanted Archie and Lili to carry the titles, most of all the HRH, and the British passports, once created, would be the first and perhaps the only legal proof of their names'. They added: "Harry was at a point where British passports for his children with their updated Sussex surnames (since the death of Queen Elizabeth II) were being blocked with a string of excuses over the course of five months. 'Out of sheer exasperation he went to his uncle to effectively say: 'My family are supposed to have the same name and they're stopping that from happening because the kids are legally HRH, so if push comes to shove, if this blows up and they won't let the kids be called Sussex, then can we use Spencer as a surname?'' It is understood that Prince Harry wants his children to have the HRH titles so that they can decide for themselves in the future if they want to be working royals. The standard wait time for a UK passport is within three weeks (Image: Phil Harris/Daily Mirror/PA Wire) Prince Harry says he doesn't know 'how much longer my father has' Prince Harry loses appeal on keeping level of police protection when in the UK According to the UK Government website, the standard wait time for a British Passport is within three weeks. However, this could take longer if more information is required or if applicants need to be interviewed. The turnaround time may also differ for those applying from another country. The application time starts when the Passport Office receives an applicant's documents.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store