Green-led Lambeth shifts to hybrid model — Lambeth 2026

Key Points

• Lambeth Council will adopt a “hybrid cabinet committee model” after concluding a full committee system is “untenable”.
• The Greens are now the largest party on Lambeth Council with 27 seats; Labour has 26 and the Liberal Democrats eight.
• Martin Abrams (Green) was elected leader of the council; two Green deputy leaders were also chosen to form a ten-councillor Green cabinet.
• Officers have been instructed to draft amendments to the borough’s constitution, including reversing a ban on discussing motions such as those on Gaza.
• The Greens had preferred a full committee system but acknowledged central government moves make that option impractical.
• Martin Abrams was previously elected as a Labour councillor in 2022, suspended in January 2024 over a Gaza ceasefire motion, and joined the Greens in September 2025.
• The change followed an extraordinary meeting called after last month’s local elections that left no overall control.

Lambeth (South London News) June 2, 2026 – Lambeth Council has moved to a “hybrid cabinet committee model” and elected a Green leader after last month’s local elections left no party with overall control. At an extraordinary council meeting, councillors confirmed Martin Abrams (Green) as leader and approved a governance shift that falls short of the full committee system Greens initially favoured.

Why did Lambeth drop plans for a full committee system and choose a hybrid model instead?

As reported by Sam Goodwin of Local Government Chronicle, the Green group told councillors it had been their preference to adopt a full committee system of governance. However, the party conceded this was “untenable due to central government’s move to effectively ban the model”. The compromise is a hybrid cabinet committee model that seeks to combine elements of the existing executive-style cabinet with committee decision-making.

Who holds power on the new council and what is the composition after the election?

Following the elections, the Green Party is the largest single party with 27 seats, Labour holds 26 seats and the Liberal Democrats have eight. With no overall majority, the Greens will lead a council administration; Martin Abrams was elected leader together with two Green deputy leaders. The new leadership will form a ten-councillor Green cabinet to run executive functions.

How was Martin Abrams’s election as leader explained and what is his political background?

As reported by Amelia Tait of the Evening Standard, Martin Abrams won his council seat in 2022 standing for Labour, but he was suspended by the Labour Party in January 2024 after supporting a Gaza ceasefire motion. He left Labour and formally joined the Green Party in September 2025. At the meeting, Abrams described his election as “a historic moment” and said he was

“deeply honoured to have been elected as the first ever Green Leader of Lambeth.”

He added:

“Lambeth is one of the most diverse and dynamic communities in the world, with deep roots in the struggle for social, racial and environmental justice. We will be true to that heritage.”

What changes to the council constitution were proposed?

Councillors agreed that officers would be tasked with “drawing up amendments to the borough’s constitution” to implement the new governance arrangements. Those amendments will also seek to “reverse the ban” on discussing certain motions, including those relating to Gaza — a measure that reflects the controversy which saw Cllr Abrams suspended from Labour in 2024.

The instruction to officers establishes a formal process to translate the hybrid model into standing orders, committee remits and constitutional text.

How will the new hybrid cabinet committee model work in practice?

The council did not publish a full operational blueprint at the extraordinary meeting, but the hybrid model typically retains a central cabinet responsible for day-to-day executive decisions while allocating policy areas to committees that include councillors across different parties.

The intention is to increase cross-party involvement in decision-making relative to a pure cabinet model, while avoiding the full committee structure which the Greens say is currently unworkable given national policy constraints.

What have council groups and other stakeholders said about the move?

Local reporting records differing reactions across political groups. The Greens framed the change as a pragmatic step to secure greater committee involvement despite central government opposition to full committee governance.

Labour members noted the loss of overall control but emphasised their role as a sizeable opposition group holding the administration to account.

The Liberal Democrats — with eight councillors — will hold a balance of power on many votes and have urged clarity on how scrutiny and community engagement will be protected under the hybrid model.

What is the legal and national context affecting local governance choices?

As covered by the Local Government Chronicle, central government has introduced measures that make adopting a full committee system more difficult for councils, prompting some boroughs to reconsider governance changes they previously sought.

The Greens’ admission that a committee system is “untenable” references this national policy shift, underlining the tension between local preferences for decision-making models and statutory or regulatory frameworks imposed from Whitehall.

What immediate steps did the council agree to after the meeting?

Councillors voted to instruct senior officers to draft constitutional amendments needed to implement the hybrid cabinet committee model and to lift certain prohibitions on motions.

The council expects to bring detailed proposals back to full council for approval at a future meeting, where members will consider the precise make-up of committees, terms of reference, delegation schemes and changes to the council’s standing orders.

What might this mean for contentious motions previously restricted by the ban?

The council’s decision to ask officers to “reverse the ban” on motions relating to issues such as Gaza signals an intent to restore broader scope for councillor-led motions.

That move responds directly to earlier controversy in which a Gaza ceasefire motion prompted national party disciplinary action and local debate about the boundaries of council debate. Restoring the ability to table and discuss such motions would alter the council’s public forum for political expression and could lead to more debates on international issues raised by local councillors.

How did the extraordinary meeting unfold and were there any notable interventions?

Minutes and local reporting show the meeting focused tightly on governance arrangements and leadership votes. Greens emphasised the historic nature of their leadership win and framed the hybrid model as a necessary compromise.

Opposition councillors pressed for guarantees on scrutiny powers and transparency. No single dramatic rupture was reported; instead, the meeting set a pathway for officers to prepare the detailed legal and procedural changes necessary to operationalise the council’s new structure.

What are the next procedural milestones before the hybrid model takes full effect?

Officers will prepare draft constitutional amendments for consideration by councillors at a subsequent meeting. That process will involve legal review, drafting of standing orders and committee terms of reference, and likely a timetable for phased implementation.

The council will also need to agree appointments to the ten-person Green cabinet and to the committees that will operate under the hybrid model.

Background

Local debates about governance models have been active for several years, with some parties arguing a committee system offers more participatory, cross-party decision-making, while others favour the clarity and accountability of a cabinet model. Lambeth’s shift follows the May local elections that produced no overall control, elevating the Greens as the largest party and giving them a mandate to change how the council operates.

The political controversy surrounding international motions — notably a Gaza ceasefire motion that resulted in disciplinary action against then-Labour councillor Martin Abrams — accentuated calls to revisit rules about what motions councillors can table and debate. National-level guidance and legislative changes have, however, constrained councils’ ability to move fully to committee systems, prompting the hybrid compromise agreed at the extraordinary meeting.

Prediction: How could this development affect Lambeth residents, councillors and local services?

• For residents: The hybrid model may produce more visible cross-party involvement in decision-making and could allow more councillor-led debates on a wider range of topics, including international concerns previously restricted. This could increase public engagement if meetings and committee work are accessible, but practical outcomes will depend on the detail of committee remits and how quickly the council implements changes.
• For councillors: Green councillors will assume executive responsibility through the ten-member cabinet, increasing their influence on council priorities. Opposition groups will need to use scrutiny committees and cross-party mechanisms to shape policy. The reversal of motion bans may enable councillors from all parties to table a broader set of motions, changing the council’s political dynamics and possibly intensifying debate.
• For local services: Day-to-day service delivery is likely to continue under existing officer management, but policy priorities could shift to reflect Green leadership — potentially emphasising environmental and social justice issues. Implementation risks include delays while constitutional amendments are drafted and approved, and potential legal or administrative challenges if national rules further restrict local governance changes.
• For wider political context: Lambeth’s pragmatic move may become a model for other councils seeking greater committee involvement within national constraints. Conversely, if the hybrid approach proves cumbersome or ineffective, it could prompt renewed debate over the merits of cabinet versus committee governance at borough level.