London is facing a growing education challenge as declining birth rates, soaring living costs and families moving away leave classrooms increasingly empty, forcing schools to consider closure and mergers and threatening the future of community institutions across the capital.
More than 90 schools have closed or merged in London over the past five years because of falling pupil numbers, according to a report by London Councils, which represents the capital’s local authorities. The report warns that the trend is intensifying, with primary school enrolment expected to fall further in several boroughs.
The consequences extend beyond school budgets. For children, parents, teachers and neighbourhoods, the loss of a school can mean disrupted education, uncertainty over the future and the disappearance of an institution that has served as a focal point for community life.
In inner London, where declining numbers have been particularly pronounced, the demographic shift is raising questions about whether the capital is becoming increasingly difficult for families to afford and sustain.
Una O’Halloran, leader of Islington Council and London Councils’ executive member for children and education, captured the emotional dimension of the crisis when she said: “Nobody goes into politics, whatever party, to close a school.”
She added: “There’s a generation that are not going to be having children, or maybe just having one child, and that’s really sad. You need children in the city.”
Her remarks reflect a dilemma confronting local authorities: how to maintain a sustainable school system when the number of children needing places is falling, while ensuring that decisions about closures do not cause unnecessary harm to families and communities.
London’s shrinking school population presents a striking demographic contradiction.
Figures cited by the London Assembly Economy, Culture and Skills Committee show that the capital’s overall population increased by approximately 506,000 between 2013 and 2023. Over the same period, however, the number of children aged between zero and nine fell by 99,100.
The divergence suggests that London’s population growth is not translating into growth among its youngest residents.
For the education sector, this has immediate consequences. School funding is closely linked to pupil numbers, meaning that fewer children can leave schools with less money to pay teachers, maintain facilities and deliver the curriculum.
As enrolment declines, some schools are left with surplus classroom space and rising per-pupil costs. Others struggle to remain financially viable even when parents and inspectors regard them as successful institutions.
The scale of the decline is particularly evident in inner London.
According to the Education Policy Institute, nine of the 10 local authorities with the fastest-shrinking populations of primary school children across the UK over the five years covered by its analysis were in London. Eight were in inner London.
Hackney has experienced a 15 per cent fall in primary school numbers since the pandemic, with a further 14 per cent decline projected between the 2024-25 and 2029-30 academic years.
Islington faces an even steeper projected reduction of 22 per cent, which London Councils has described as the sharpest decline in the country.
The pressure is not confined to primary education. After years of growth, secondary school pupil numbers are also expected to begin falling from 2027, according to reporting by the Financial Times.
The changing figures are forcing councils to reconsider school-place planning, staffing, budgets and the use of buildings originally designed to accommodate a growing population of children.
The pressures facing London’s schools are illustrated by the proposed closure of Kew Riverside Primary School in Richmond, south-west London.
Richmond Council has proposed shutting the school at the end of the academic year because of falling enrolment and concerns about its long-term financial sustainability.
The school, which has capacity for 210 pupils, currently has 87 children, according to Achieving for Children, Richmond’s children’s services contractor. Pupil numbers are expected to decline further over the next five years.
Despite efforts to streamline staffing and reduce expenditure, the school faces a projected budget deficit of more than £400,000 by the 2028-29 financial year.
The proposal has prompted concern among parents who argue that a school with a positive inspection report, strong community support and established provision for pupils with additional needs should be given more time to attract families and demonstrate its financial viability.
In a written question submitted ahead of a council meeting, parent Adam Smith questioned the urgency of the proposed closure.
He argued that families had returned from the summer break only to find themselves facing uncertainty about the school’s future.
Smith described Kew Riverside as a thriving, close-knit school with significant special educational needs and disabilities provision and a positive Ofsted inspection outcome.
He also challenged the council’s approach to a projected deficit, arguing that the school should be given an opportunity to build on its inspection results and attract more pupils before a final decision is made.
The school’s circumstances highlight the tension between financial sustainability and educational value.
A school can be performing well academically and providing effective pastoral care while still struggling to meet its costs when pupil numbers fall below the level needed to sustain its budget.
For councils, the challenge is deciding whether falling enrolment represents a temporary setback that can be reversed or a longer-term demographic shift requiring difficult decisions about school organisation.
The proposed closure has also raised questions about the future of specialist support for children with special educational needs and disabilities.
An Ofsted report published in September praised Kew Riverside’s staff for supporting pupils’ wellbeing and meeting their wider needs. Inspectors described the school’s curriculum as ambitious and found that pupils generally achieved well.
The report also highlighted the support provided to children with SEND and those known to social care. Disadvantaged pupils were found to benefit from thoughtful use of additional funding, while the school was praised for nurturing pupils’ character.
The council committee meeting was told that the school supports 17 pupils with SEND, including six children with an education, health and care plan.
For parents, the potential loss of the school therefore raises concerns beyond the availability of ordinary classroom places.
Children with additional needs may depend on established relationships with teachers, familiar routines and a supportive environment that understands their individual circumstances. A move to another school can require families to navigate new arrangements and ensure that appropriate support continues.
Parents have expressed their attachment to Kew Riverside in letters published on the school’s website.
One described it as a place where their children felt safe, supported and valued, adding that staff had built genuine relationships with pupils and listened to parents’ concerns.
Another questioned why a school with happy children, committed teachers and a positive inspection report was being considered for closure.
A third highlighted the care provided to a child requiring additional support, describing the school’s staff as exceptionally caring.
These accounts underline the human dimension of a decision that might otherwise be framed primarily in terms of pupil forecasts and financial projections.
Richmond Council has said the proposed closure is not a reflection of concerns about teaching standards, school leadership or educational quality.
Julia Cambridge, the council’s Liberal Democrat education committee chair, said no final decision had been made and that feedback received during the consultation would be considered after it closed on October 16.
She said the school could not make further significant savings without compromising curriculum delivery and that its remaining reserves were expected to be exhausted by the end of the academic year.
If the closure proceeds, every pupil would be guaranteed a place at Darell Primary School in Kew, while families could also apply to other schools with available places.
The council is also considering a separate proposal to bring together Hampton Wick Infant and Nursery School and St John the Baptist Church of England Junior School. The plan would create a single 210-place primary school with an integrated nursery.
Both proposals demonstrate how falling pupil numbers are prompting councils to consider consolidation as a way of keeping school provision financially sustainable.
At the heart of the problem is a combination of declining birth rates, housing pressures, childcare costs and wider changes in how people live and work.
For many families, the decision to have children, have another child or remain in the capital is increasingly shaped by financial realities.
Figures cited by the London Assembly Economy, Culture and Skills Committee show that a typical London home costs approximately 11.1 times the average salary, compared with 7.7 times across England.
Rents are also reported to be around 60 per cent higher than the national average, while nursery care for children under two in inner London costs approximately 34 per cent more than the English average.
These expenses can place significant pressure on household budgets, particularly for parents balancing rent or mortgage payments with childcare, transport, food and other essential costs.
For younger adults, the prospect of raising a family in London may appear financially unrealistic. For families who already have children, moving to a less expensive area can offer access to more affordable housing and additional living space.
Such decisions can gradually reshape neighbourhoods, reducing the number of children entering reception classes and leaving schools with fewer pupils than their buildings and budgets were designed to accommodate.
Declining fertility rates add to the pressure.
Reporting cited in the supplied materials indicates that fertility rates in several London areas were close to 1.0 birth per woman in 2024, well below the approximate 2.1 births per woman associated with long-term population replacement in a population without compensating migration.
However, fertility rates alone do not determine school enrolment. Migration, household formation and the movement of families between boroughs also influence how many children live in an area and where they attend school.
Changes in employment patterns, including remote working, have also been identified by London Councils as part of the wider picture.
O’Halloran has pointed to the housing crisis, the cost of living, changing decisions about parenthood, Brexit and remote working as contributing factors.
Some commentators have also questioned whether increases in the minimum wage and National Insurance costs have placed additional pressure on childcare providers, potentially adding to the costs faced by families.
Taken together, these pressures suggest that London’s falling pupil numbers are not simply an education problem. They are also connected to housing policy, economic conditions, childcare provision and the broader question of whether families can afford to establish long-term roots in the capital.
When pupil numbers decline, closing or merging schools can appear to be a practical response to excess capacity.
Maintaining underused buildings and staffing classrooms with fewer pupils can become increasingly expensive, particularly when councils face competing demands on limited budgets.
Yet London Councils’ report warns that the process of school closure can itself cause considerable harm.
Lengthy consultations may leave parents uncertain about whether to seek alternative school places, while teachers and other staff are left questioning their job security.
Children may face anxiety about losing familiar surroundings, friends and trusted adults. Families may also have to reorganise transport and childcare arrangements if a closure forces them to attend a school farther from home.
The report says headteachers have used words such as “traumatic”, “shame” and “horrendous” to describe their experiences of closures.
It stresses that decisions about school organisation should account for the human consequences alongside pupil numbers and financial considerations.
For many neighbourhoods, a school is more than a place where children receive lessons. It can be a source of community identity, a meeting point for parents and a centre for local activities.
Its closure can therefore leave a gap that extends beyond education. 
O’Halloran has warned that councils need greater flexibility to determine how former school buildings are used, rather than allowing them to remain empty while authorities wait for approval.
She has also called for communities to be involved in decisions about the future of school sites.
The issue is particularly important because a closed school building can represent both a lost public service and a potential resource.
London Councils’ report identifies examples of local authorities finding alternative uses for surplus school space.
In Hammersmith and Fulham, spare accommodation has been leased to private and community organisations, generating more than £100,000 annually for one host school.
In Bexley, surplus space across nine schools has been used to create 122 additional places for children with SEND. The initiative is estimated to have saved £8 million by reducing the need for costly placements outside the borough.
In Croydon, spare capacity has been used to support a unit helping asylum-seeking children transition into mainstream education.
These examples suggest that falling enrolment does not necessarily mean every underused classroom or school building must be lost to the community.
However, London Councils says delays in obtaining Department for Education approval for changes of use can leave buildings vacant for extended periods.
The organisation has called for a more consistent and less disruptive approach to school closures, alongside greater flexibility over the future use of former school sites.
The fall in pupil numbers is not unique to the British capital.
According to reporting by the Financial Times, several major cities in Europe and the United States are experiencing similar demographic changes.
Primary school enrolment in Paris has fallen by approximately a quarter over the past decade, while the number of children in the equivalent age group in New York declined by almost 20 per cent in the decade to autumn 2024.
Barcelona has also recorded a fall in preschool entry, with numbers in 2024 approximately 16 per cent below their 2016 level.
As in London, declining birth rates and high housing costs have been identified as important factors.
The use of homes for short-term rentals and housing development that does not adequately meet the needs of families have also been cited as pressures in some cities.
When family-sized homes are scarce or unaffordable, households with children may relocate to areas where housing costs are lower and living arrangements are more practical.
Nevertheless, the experiences of other European cities suggest that demographic decline is not necessarily inevitable in every urban area.
Vienna has developed a substantial supply of subsidised and municipal housing, including accommodation suitable for families. Copenhagen has also invested in childcare and parental leave policies, while immigration has helped support its population.
These differences do not guarantee that any single policy will reverse falling school enrolment. They do, however, highlight the relationship between family living conditions and the demographic future of cities.
For London, the challenge is not simply to predict how many children will enter school in the next five or 10 years. It is also to consider how housing, childcare and family support policies influence the decisions people make about where to live and whether to have children.
The prospect of London becoming a “childless city” is an alarming description of a longer-term risk highlighted in the debate over falling pupil numbers.
Since 2018, approximately 100 of the capital’s 2,500 schools have closed, equivalent to around four per cent of the total, according to figures cited in the supplied materials.
If enrolment continues to decline, more schools could face pressure to merge, reduce capacity or close.
Councils are nevertheless wary of making decisions that might prove difficult to reverse.
Hackney, for example, planned for a pupil boom more than a decade ago but has since experienced falling demand. The borough is now cautious about reducing school capacity too aggressively in case numbers recover.
This creates a difficult planning problem.
Keeping too many school places open can strain budgets and divert resources from other services. Closing too many schools can leave communities without sufficient provision if families return or local populations change.
Demographic projections can guide decisions, but they cannot eliminate uncertainty about future birth rates, migration, housing development and family choices.
The decline in primary enrolment also does not mean that every London borough faces the same circumstances. Some areas may experience sharper reductions than others, while demand for particular services, including specialist SEND provision, can continue to rise even as overall pupil numbers fall.
A sustainable response will therefore require councils to examine local needs rather than treating the capital’s schools as a single, uniform system.
For parents at Kew Riverside and other schools facing possible closure, the immediate concern is whether their children’s education and support will remain stable.
For councils, the task is to match school capacity to projected demand without undermining educational quality or imposing unnecessary disruption on families.
London Councils has called on the government to establish a more standardised process for managing school closures, reduce uncertainty during consultations and give local authorities greater flexibility to repurpose buildings once schools shut.
The Richmond proposals also underline the importance of engaging parents and staff before decisions are finalised, particularly where schools have established strengths in teaching, pastoral care and support for children with additional needs.
Beyond the immediate debate over school places, however, London’s demographic shift raises a broader question: what kind of city will the capital be for the next generation?
If housing and childcare remain beyond the reach of many families, declining pupil numbers may continue to reshape the education system and the communities schools serve.
The challenge is not simply to keep every school open regardless of financial circumstances. It is to ensure that decisions about school provision form part of a wider response to the pressures affecting families across London.
A school closure may balance a budget or address surplus capacity, but it cannot, on its own, resolve the conditions that make raising children in the capital increasingly difficult.
As the debate continues, London’s education leaders face a choice between managing the consequences of demographic decline and working with housing, childcare and community partners to address some of its underlying causes.
For the children, parents and teachers caught in the middle, the stakes are immediate. For London itself, the question is whether a city that continues to grow in population can remain a place where families can afford to build their futures.
•Additional reports: Yahoo news, The Week & My London
