I notice that most of the discussion about The Slab, including the Secretary of State’s very lukewarm support for it, couches the argument as one between ‘conservationists’ and ‘aesthetics’ versus economic growth.  It’s viewed as a victory for economic growth consolidating London’s position as a global financial centre.

This prompts the questions:  is there a proven link between high-rise development and economic growth ?  Who are the tenants of The Slab likely to be ?

I ask this question because my own experience of the leaders of global finance, including those who worked in the offices of the oligarchs, is that they liked relatively small offices in Mayfair or St. James which were in easy reach of their houses in the west end and so they could congregate in the clubs and smart restaurants for breakfast and in the evening nearby.

I don’t see them sitting in vast open-plan offices South of the river, just because it’s close to Waterloo.

The only time that I have attended a meeting for inward investors, London was being sold for the quality of its environment, its schools, its housing stock, the community of other investors, not because of the availability of vacant tower blocks.

So, does disfiguring the urban environment automatically lead to financial growth ?  I doubt it.

https://bnnbreaking.com/politics/the-slab-a-colossal-structure-redefining-londons-skyline-and-igniting-global-debate