Sir Sadiq Khan to pedestrianise Oxford Street ‘as quickly as possible'
Plans to ban traffic from part of Oxford Street will be implemented 'as quickly as possible' as they are supported by 'the vast majority of Londoners', mayor Sir Sadiq Khan said.
Two-thirds (66%) of respondents to a consultation support the pedestrianisation plan, Sir Sadiq's office said.
A separate YouGov survey conducted in September 2024 indicated 63% of Londoners are in favour of the project.
Oxford Street is one of the world's busiest shopping areas, with around half a million visitors each day.
Sir Sadiq Khan wants to ban vehicles from a 0.7-mile stretch between Oxford Circus and Marble Arch, with the potential for further changes towards Tottenham Court Road.
Detailed proposals for traffic will be consulted on later this year.
A previous attempt by Sir Sadiq to pedestrianise that part of Oxford Street was blocked by then-Conservative run Westminster City Council in 2018.
His latest proposals depend on him obtaining permission from Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner in her role as Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government to establish a new Mayoral Development Corporation, which would provide planning powers.
The aim is for this to be created by the start of next year.
Sir Sadiq said: 'Oxford Street has suffered over many years, so urgent action is needed to give our nation's high street a new lease of life.
'It's clear that the vast majority of Londoners and major businesses back our exciting plans, so I'm pleased to confirm that we will now be moving ahead as quickly as possible.
'We want to rejuvenate Oxford Street; establish it as a global leader for shopping, leisure and outdoor events with a world-class, accessible, pedestrianised avenue.
'This will help to attract more international visitors and act as a magnet for new investment and job creation, driving growth and economic prosperity for decades to come.'
Ms Rayner said: 'We want to see Oxford Street become the thriving place to be for tourists and Londoners alike, and that's why we welcome the Mayor of London's bold proposals to achieve that.
'We will support the mayor in delivering this ambitious vision, which will help to breathe new life into Oxford Street – driving investment, creating new jobs for local people and providing a boost to economic growth in the capital.'
Adam Hug, leader of Labour-controlled Westminster City Council, said: 'While the mayor's formal decision today was not the City Council's preferred outcome, it is far from unexpected, and it is now important for Oxford Street's future to move forward together.
'Since the mayor's new approach was made public last autumn, Westminster has worked pragmatically and productively with the Greater London Authority (GLA) to ensure that the plan for Oxford Street more closely meets the needs of businesses, visitors, and residents.
'Since 2022, Oxford Street has roared back to life after the pandemic. Such is the level of retail confidence that existing brands have spent £118 million refitting their stores in the last 12 months alone, according to Savills.
'Westminster City Council will work constructively with the mayor's team to ensure the nation's high street is re-imagined in a way that works for visitors, shoppers, and our residents.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
29 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Why FM is suddenly talking about Scottish independence?
At no point did he mention independence. The SNP's founding goal was not noted once in his speech nor in the 46-page accompanying document. Instead, there were announcements on scrapping peak rail fares, on creating 100,000 more GP appointments and the lifting of the blanket ban on rail passengers drinking alcohol while travelling. READ MORE: John Swinney looks to the past as he plans for the future Future SNP leader is obvious - and it's not Forbes or Flynn SNP ministers to unveil £1 billion crackdown on public sector 'waste' John Swinney has discussed indyref2 with PM, says senior SNP minister What's behind the Scottish Government drive to cut public sector 'waste'? But what was also telling was that the lack of any talk around independence did not even merit any news coverage. That's because of the implicit acceptance by the SNP, by opposition parties and by the media that independence was now "off the radar", as Nicola Sturgeon pointed out in January. Nobody was actually expecting the SNP's fourth First Minister to say anything about independence. Now there are strong reasons why he didn't mention it. First, Mr Swinney's SNP has not got a majority in Holyrood with his minority government requiring the support of opposition parties to get his legislation passed. Earlier this year the SNP - perhaps wary of giving the Greens too much influence following the collapse of the Bute House Agreement last year - struck an agreement with the Lib Dems (as well as the Greens) to support the Budget. But Alex Cole-Hamilton's price for his party's support was that Mr Swinney's government's must not spend a "penny" promoting independence nor that the government spend time debating the issue in Holyrood. The second reason why Mr Swinney left out independence from his programme for government is likely grounded in what pollin suggests are voters' priorities - namely, cutting NHS waiting times, improving living standards and tackling the cost of living through growing the economy and improving education. YouGov research in March put independence much lower down the list of priorities for Scots with just 14% saying it should be a top priority for the Scottish Government. However, what may explain why Mr Swinney about turn - giving a big speech today making the case for independence - is a pressing need to motivate SNP supporters. The same YouGov polling in March found that independence is a high priority for this group of voters ranking third as their policy priority (behind health and education). The SNP's defeat in the Hamilton, Larkhall, Stonehouse by-election, losing the seat to Labour, saw the party's support drop there from 46% in the 2021 election to 29% on June 5. It is certainly a wake-up call to the party - and of course Mr Swinney - showing it that the SNP needs to regain the support of a large number of former voters, some of whom may have stayed at home or voted for other parties two weeks ago. The SNP's hope is of course that ramping up the independence message ahead of the next Holyrood election will persuade disgruntled SNP voters to back them to win again. The First Minister will be hoping for the same outcome - and that another win will secure his own position for the next parliamentary term amid rumblings of discontent in his party. We'll find out whether the strategy works when Scotland heads to the polls in less than a year.
Spectator
42 minutes ago
- Spectator
Poll: three per cent of women back Stella Creasy's amendment
It is a big week for big Commons moments. On Monday, we had the long-awaited announcement of an inquiry into grooming gangs; today it is the battle of the abortion amendments. This afternoon Lindsay Hoyle will choose whether to call Tonia Antoniazzi or Stella Creasy's amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill. Antoniazzi's measure would allow abortion for any reason up to birth while maintaining criminal sanctions for doctors performing late-term or sex-selective procedures. Creasy, however, has adopted the more hard-line position of full decriminalisation in all circumstances. Now, Mr S has got his hands on some polling – and it is bad news for Stella. More than 2,100 adults were polled by Whitestone Insight between 2nd and 3rd June. When asked 'What do you think the time limit should be in Britain?' just three per cent of women believe that 'it should be extended to birth'. That, incidentally, is the same percentage of Labour voters who agree with the Hon. Member for Walthamstow. The polling also shows that the public ranked introducing 'abortion up to birth' at the bottom of a list of twenty possible priorities they want the the House of Commons to pursue over the next 12 months, with only 1 in 50 people listing it as a preferred area of focus. And when asked the following question: In recent years, a few prosecutions have taken place for illegal abortions after the 24-week time limit and as late as eight months into pregnancy. Where do you think the blame should mainly lie for this? Only eight per cent blamed 'The law which does not permit abortions of healthy babies beyond 24 weeks gestation, on the basis that this is considered to be the point after which most babies are able to survive outside the womb'. So much for the political mainstream…
Spectator
42 minutes ago
- Spectator
Kemi Badenoch defends the Tories' record on grooming gangs
Kemi Badenoch said that 'survivors and their families' have been 'ignored for far too long' as she appeared alongside those affected by the grooming gangs' scandal. 'What this morning is about is not the politics, but giving…(victims) a platform to say what they want to see from a national inquiry,' the Tory leader said at a press conference in Westminster. The Tory leader was on less safe turf when she claimed, slightly implausibly, that she wanted to 'take the politics out of' the issue Marlon West, the father of grooming gangs' victim Scarlett, asked about local-led inquiries and whether 'local authorities are going to be answering their own homework.' Fiona Goddard, a survivor who waived her anonymity, urged law enforcement to continue. 'Work cannot stop on tackling crime in the here and now,' she said. Then there was Teresa, whose son was abused by grooming gangs. She raised the question of help for the survivors. 'We're just left with nothing', she said. 'We're here to pick up the pieces.' Finally, there was Lucia, a campaigner for survivors. She raised the case of a Manchester charity, who took a survivor to the police, who told her she 'won't get a court hearing until 2028.' Each of the four offered a damning indictment of state failure in Britain. But the question for Badenoch and shadow home secretary Chris Philp, who appeared alongside the victims, is: how are you going to fix it? Philp offered his own criteria for the inquiry, which, he said, must cover all 50 towns and cities affected. Each of the local inquiries must have statutory powers to compel the production of evidence, he insisted. Philp also said that the probes should be completed within two years and that each one should be 'genuinely independent'. Inevitably, the Q&A focussed on the record of the last Conservative government. Did they do enough to ask the hard questions of state institutions? 'We did a lot and the more we did the more we realised that even more needed to be done', replied Badenoch. 'Apologies are easy, what we need to see is action', she added. 'We can sit here and say sorry all day long but what I actually want to see is an inquiry that actually gets to the bottom of this.' Her remarks were echoed by the survivors' families on the panel, who stressed the need for deeds, not words. The Tory leader was on less safe turf when she claimed, slightly implausibly, that she wanted to 'take the politics out of' the issue – 24 hours after attacking Home Secretary Yvette Cooper vociferously in the Commons. But she could at least point to the Prime Minister's initial ham-fisted response to calls for an inquiry back in January. 'Who was it who said this was 'dog-whistle politics?' It was Keir Starmer and his ministers', she said.
