Key Points

• Redbridge Council spent £288,423.97 on glyphosate-based weedkillers in 2025, the highest amount among UK councils, according to FOI data collated by Pesticide Action Network (PAN) UK.
• The spending represents an increase from £260,444.71 in 2024, data from PAN UK shows.
• Redbridge was one of around 200 UK councils still using glyphosate-containing pesticides, as identified by the Mail on Sunday.
• The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2A).
• The UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is considering whether to renew glyphosate’s safety licence, while DEFRA and HSE state it remains approved and considered safe when used in line with guidance.
• A Redbridge Council spokesperson said the cost reflects both product and professional staff required for safe, effective application, and cited ongoing value-for-money reviews.
• The council highlighted existing measures to reduce chemical treatment areas, including more than 4km of Pollinator Pathways and a tree-pit adoption programme.
• Local campaign group Wanstead Climate Action Coordinators warned that increased spending could mean greater exposure for children and vulnerable groups.

Redbridge (East London Times) July 27, 2026 —Redbridge Council has faced criticism after spending almost £300,000 last year on glyphosate-based weedkillers, the highest single amount recorded among UK local authorities. The east London council was one of approximately 200 councils identified by the Mail on Sunday as continuing to use pesticides containing glyphosate, a herbicide classified by the World Health Organization’s cancer research arm as “probably carcinogenic to humans”.

What do the figures show about Redbridge’s glyphosate expenditure?

Freedom of Information (FOI) data compiled by Pesticide Action Network (PAN) UK shows Redbridge spent £288,423.97 on weedkillers in 2025.

This marks an increase from £260,444.71 in 2024, according to the same dataset. The Mail on Sunday reported that Redbridge’s total was the singular highest amount among councils surveyed for the year.

How has Redbridge Council responded to the criticism?

A Redbridge Council spokesperson told reporters that the total cost

“reflects both the product and the professional staff needed to carry out the weed‑killing safely and effectively”.

The spokesperson added:

“As with all contracts, our priority is ensuring we get the best value for money for local taxpayers, and we carry out periodic reviews to make sure this happens.”

On the safety question, the council noted:

“The Health and Safety Executive and DEFRA have been clear that glyphosate is approved for use in the UK and considered safe when used in line with regulatory guidance.”

It added that glyphosate

“remains widely used by local authorities as part of their weed‑control programmes”.

The council also pointed to existing initiatives intended to reduce chemical use, including

“more than 4km of Pollinator Pathways and our tree‑pit adoption programme, which remove areas from chemical treatment”.

What concerns have local campaigners raised?

Local campaign group Wanstead Climate Action Coordinators said the increased spending meant

“more children and other vulnerable groups are exposed to noxious chemicals”.

The group’s comment reflects wider concerns about routine use of glyphosate in public spaces such as pavements, parks and play areas.

What is the regulatory position on glyphosate in the UK and EU?

Glyphosate is the world’s most widely used herbicide and is commonly known by its original trading name Roundup. While it remains legal in the UK, its use has been restricted in the European Union.

In the UK, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) is now considering whether to renew its safety licence, according to reporting by the Mail on Sunday.

How has the WHO classified glyphosate and what evidence underpins that?

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the World Health Organization, classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2A) in 2015.

As reported by journalists covering the IARC monograph, the classification was based on research on human exposure in the U.S., Canada and Sweden, alongside animal studies that the agency said showed “convincing evidence” of cancer in laboratory animals.

The IARC assessment also noted “limited evidence” in humans, particularly for non-Hodgkin lymphoma, a type of blood cancer.iarc.who+2

Other assessments have reached different conclusions. A joint WHO/FAO meeting in 2016 concluded that glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans from exposure through the diet, citing a large cohort study that found no association at any exposure level for non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Regulatory bodies including the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency have also found a link between glyphosate and cancer to be unlikely, according to reporting at the time.

What do other media reports say about the Redbridge story?

Coverage of the Redbridge case has appeared across multiple outlets. The Evening Standard reported that Redbridge Council is

“under fire after spending almost £300,000 last year on the use of a potential hazardous weedkiller”.

Yahoo News UK summarised the same FOI findings, noting the council was one of 200 found by the Mail on Sunday to still be using glyphosate-containing pesticides.

The London Reporter also carried the story, reiterating the WHO classification and the scale of the council’s expenditure.

What alternatives or mitigation measures are being used locally?

Beyond the council’s reference to Pollinator Pathways and tree-pit adoption, the FOI-driven reporting highlights that many councils are reviewing or limiting glyphosate use in sensitive areas, though specific operational details for Redbridge beyond the quoted measures were not provided in the available reports.

Explore More Redbridge Council News

Redbridge Council Criticised Over £300k Glyphosate Weedkiller Spend In Redbridge 2026

Redbridge Council Refuses 9-Bed HMO at Avondale Crescent, Ilford 2026

Background: How did glyphosate use become a council policy issue?

Glyphosate-based herbicides have been widely adopted by local authorities for pavement and grass verge maintenance because they are effective and relatively inexpensive.

Over time, public concern grew following the IARC 2015 classification and subsequent litigation and media attention around glyphosate’s potential health effects.

In response, some councils introduced pollinator-friendly strategies, reduced spraying frequencies, or switched to alternative weed-control methods in certain zones.

The current debate centres on balancing cost-effective vegetation management with public health perceptions and environmental policies, against a backdrop of differing scientific assessments and ongoing regulatory review by the HSE.

Prediction: How might this development affect residents and councils in East London?

If scrutiny of glyphosate spending continues, residents in East London boroughs such as Redbridge may see increased pressure on councils to publish detailed spraying schedules, expand chemical-free zones, and accelerate adoption of non-chemical alternatives.

For councils, this could mean higher short-term operational costs or changes in staffing and contractor arrangements, but also potential long-term savings if alternative methods reduce reliance on licensed chemicals amid tighter regulation.

For local campaign groups and schools, the focus is likely to shift toward data transparency and exposure reduction near playgrounds and high-footfall areas, potentially influencing future procurement and public health communications.