Key Points
- The White City Residents Association has accused the area’s Labour councillors of being largely absent and showing “increasingly limited engagement” with residents.
- The group claimed one councillor has attended only one open meeting in the past four years.
- Residents have also expressed dissatisfaction with changes to public surgeries at the estate.
- Labour said its councillors go “above and beyond” for residents and that their approach is direct and hands-on.
- The dispute comes after a period of upheaval in White City, including the fatal fire at a former Over 50s Centre and ongoing questions about the site.
- The councillors mentioned are Andrew Jones, Natalia Perez and Frances Umeh, who held the three White City seats at the May elections.
White City (West London News) July 25, 2026 – The fulham/white-city/">White City Residents Association (WCRA) said people living on the estate have “expressed concerns about the support” they receive from their councillors, even when they are able to contact them. The group said some residents have been left waiting for updates on their issues, according to the Local Democracy Reporting Service.
The association’s criticism is focused on what it describes as a pattern of poor engagement. It said changes to public surgeries have also left locals feeling “disappointed”, adding that residents want more reliable opportunities to meet their elected representatives in person.
What does the WCRA allege about attendance?
The WCRA told the Local Democracy Reporting Service that it has held seven standard open meetings since June 2025. It said those meetings do not include one immediately after the fire at the former Over 50s Centre, which it described as a community briefing.
According to the association’s account, Cllr Natalia Perez attended four of those seven meetings and sent apologies for three, while Cllr Frances Umeh also attended four and sent apologies for three. Cllr Andrew Jones, the group said, attended none and apologised for three.
The WCRA also claimed that, of the open meetings held this year, councillors had only been to one, in January, and that Cllr Jones had attended just a single session in the last four years. The Local Democracy Reporting Service said those points were put to the Labour group and were not contested.
How has Labour responded?
A hammersmith-and-fulham/">Hammersmith and Fulham Labour spokesperson rejected the criticism, saying councillors go “above and beyond for residents” and work “constructively with the whole community to deliver real results”. The spokesperson said being a local representative is not a “tick-box exercise”.
Labour said the White City councillors understand how difficult recent weeks have been for residents after the fire, and that they are committed to being visible and available.
The party said one of the monthly drop-in surgeries has been replaced with “street surgeries”, with councillors going door-to-door across the White City Estate and wider ward.
The spokesperson added that residents can still contact councillors by email, phone or post, and that a surgery continues at Shepherd’s Bush Library on the first Tuesday of each month, other than August.
What is the dispute over surgeries?
The WCRA said the monthly surgeries previously held at the estate’s community centre were cancelled, and that residents were not told clearly about the change. It said the new “street surgeries” were unclear to many people and could make access to councillors more difficult.
Labour said the new approach is designed to bring councillors closer to residents by meeting people where they live rather than requiring them to travel to a fixed venue. The party said the first street surgery took place earlier this month and involved all three ward councillors.
The residents’ group, however, argued that people expect to be able to connect with councillors in person when they need support, particularly when there are local problems that need a quick response.
What wider context surrounds White City?
White City is one of the more deprived wards in Hammersmith and Fulham and has seen extensive change over the past decade, including new housing blocks and the growth of the White City Innovation District.
The area is also known for the White City Estate, a major mid-20th-century housing complex home to more than 4,000 people.
The debate about councillor engagement comes shortly after the fatal fire at a former Over 50s Centre in the estate, which killed three people.
The building is owned by Hammersmith and Fulham Council, and residents have raised concerns about its condition. An investigation by the Metropolitan Police is ongoing.
At the May elections, Labour held all three White City seats with Andrew Jones, Natalia Perez and Frances Umeh. The party also kept control of Hammersmith and Fulham Council, which it has run since 2014.
How has the ward’s political position been framed?
Labour pointed to its election results in White City as evidence that residents have confidence in the councillors’ work. The spokesperson said the ward delivered one of Labour’s strongest results in London at the recent elections.
The WCRA’s criticism, however, suggests that election success has not removed frustration among some residents about day-to-day access to councillors and how local issues are handled.
The row therefore highlights a gap between electoral support and the lived experience of some residents on the estate.
Background of the particular development
The development behind this dispute is the growing tension between White City residents and their local Labour councillors over representation, accessibility and post-fire community support.
It follows changes to councillor surgeries, repeated concerns about meeting attendance and wider pressure on the estate after the fire at the former Over 50s Centre.
The issue sits within a longer-term transformation of White City itself, where regeneration, new housing and redevelopment have altered the area while longstanding residents continue to seek more visible local representation.
In that sense, the current row is not just about one meeting or one surgery, but about how local democracy is experienced on the ground.
Prediction
For White City residents, this dispute is likely to increase scrutiny of how often councillors attend local meetings, how quickly they respond to casework and whether new “street surgeries” are seen as a practical alternative to fixed drop-ins.
If the councillors maintain regular on-the-ground contact, the criticism may ease; if not, frustration among residents could grow.
For the wider audience in Hammersmith and Fulham, the development may shape how people judge the council’s handling of sensitive local issues, especially after the fire.
It could also influence expectations around councillor accessibility across other wards, with more attention placed on public engagement rather than election results alone.
