• Reference: 2025/4560
• Question by: Zoë Garbett
• Meeting date: 18 December 2025

Development analyst Molior’s ‘Residential Development in London’ report from October 2025 has said that development is currently ‘unviable’ – on the terms set by developers – in half of London. They go on to say developments that are currently unviable will continue to be unviable “even if the land is provided free and there are no planning obligations like CIL and affordable housing”. This suggests that your emergency housebuilding measures will not unlock new private development, but simply subsidise existing developments already considered ‘viable’. What is your response to this analysis?

• Reference: 2025/4559
• Question by: Zoë Garbett
• Meeting date: 18 December 2025

Following the publication of the 30 Patterns Of Harm: A Structural Review of Systemic Racism within the London Metropolitan Police Service report by Dr Shereen Daniels, what are you doing to ensure that the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) changes for the better as a result of this report?

• Reference: 2025/4558
• Question by: Zoë Garbett
• Meeting date: 18 December 2025

Will you call on the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to publish the full data on every instance when powers under sections 12, 14 and 14ZA of the Public Order Act 1986 are used in London to impose conditions or restrictions? This should include the date and time of every protest, the conditions imposed, the triggers, the theme of the protests/assembly, demographic information such as age, sex and ethnicity, and the level of authorisation and the number of resultant arrests.

• Reference: 2025/4557
• Question by: Zoë Garbett
• Meeting date: 18 December 2025

Will you call on the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to prepare and publish impact assessments setting out the reasons for imposing all advance restrictions on protests in London and do you agree that these impact assessments should explain how the balance between the possibility of disruption and the obligation to facilitate and protect Article 11 freedom of assembly rights were considered?

• Reference: 2025/4556
• Question by: Zoë Garbett
• Meeting date: 18 December 2025

In the April 2025 report, Public order policing – the Met’s approach, from the London Assembly Police and Crime committee, recommendation 11 states: “The Met should issue comprehensive new guidance for the public within the next 12 months on how new protest policing powers will be used going forward, and how it will ensure the use of these powers doesn’t infringe upon protected rights to freedom of expression and assembly. This guidance should include specific sections on the use of Serious Disruption Prevention Orders and the use of stop and search in a protest context.” The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)...

• Reference: 2025/4555
• Question by: Zoë Garbett
• Meeting date: 18 December 2025

A constituent has contacted me with deep concern about the cuts to the Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund and the impact of these cuts on the thousands of London families who love and support children through special guardianships and adoption. Do you share our concern, and will you write to the Minister for Children to oppose these cuts?

• Reference: 2025/4554
• Question by: Zoë Garbett
• Meeting date: 18 December 2025

Thank you for your answer to my question 2025/2174. In November 2025, The Guardian reported that the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) had appointed Dr Gillian Fairfield to chair the follow-up review of the progress made against Baroness Casey’s recommendations. It is three months until another year will have passed, making it three years since the Casey Review. What are you doing to ensure that the follow up review that takes place will be as rigorous as the initial Casey Review?

• Reference: 2025/4553
• Question by: Zoë Garbett
• Meeting date: 18 December 2025

What mitigations is the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) putting in place to ensure that the ‘crime hotspots’ they deploy Live Facial Recognition (LFR) technology at are not subject to circular logic resulting in them always being considered crime hotspots by the MPS due to the arrests they are making as part of deployments?

• Reference: 2025/4552
• Question by: Zoë Garbett
• Meeting date: 18 December 2025

The October 2025 report, Live Facial Recognition Annual Report, from the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) contains a line that states: “We have regularly reached out to external bodies to seek others’ advice, challenge and expertise, to help make our policy as good as it can be.” Could you share what external bodies the MPS has sought advice, challenge and expertise from?

• Reference: 2025/4551
• Question by: Zoë Garbett
• Meeting date: 18 December 2025

The October 2025 report, Live Facial Recognition Annual Report, from the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) contains a line that states: “LFR helps the MPS locate these people without resorting to more intrusive, expensive and time-consuming tactics” and, “We know that LFR boosts productivity. By making officers more effective during hotspot operations, LFR allows us to achieve more arrests and deliver a greater impact on public safety than would be possible with the same resources alone.” Could you provide evidence proving that LFR boosts productivity and is less expensive and time consuming than other tactics?