> The Corporation will now have to file a Private Bill in Parliament as it seeks to absolve itself of the legal responsibility of running the markets.
The Corporation in this case is the Corporation of the City of London, which is the local government authority for the City of London, which is only the part of London that is within the walls of Roman Londinium. The Parliamentary Bill may very well not pass, in which case the Corporation may be in something of a pickle.
Specifically it exists because it existed before 1189
But while it was created by neither statue nor royal charter, I doubt the parliament could not end it if it so decided....
I think it's highly unlikely that it would fail.
Also known as the most efficient and high volume money laundering machine ever devised by man. Do a deep dive into russian oligarch money and the City of London, from reputable journalism sources, and you won't like what you find.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/03/28/how-putins-oli...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/14/nearly...
https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2022/02/04/...
> The mayor is scrutinised by the London Assembly and, supported by their Mayoral Cabinet, directs the entirety of London, including the City of London (for which there is also the Lord Mayor of the City of London)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayor_of_London
> In 1965 the county was abolished and replaced by Greater London, a two-tier administrative area governed by the Greater London Council, thirty-two London boroughs, and the City of London Corporation.
Haven't read it for a while but I do recall the word "strange" appearing a lot.
Think of it as a vertical, focused embassy
British papers tend to mix up City of London as in the old city and city of London as in the general financial services including Canary Wharf etc. Bit like how 'Wall Street' doesn't always mean that exact street.
> The Parliamentary Bill may very well not pass, in which case the Corporation may be in something of a pickled herring.
It's also a beautiful and historic building and site.
I'm not sure what led to the decision to close it, but I can only assume it was for commercial interests of some form, and will eventually be turned into souless apartments, and the surrounding businesses, bars, pubs and nightclubs will also fall into decline.
So the "850 year old" food market is actually a 42 year old market, and will likely continue to operate from a different location as it has done many times in the past.
Edit, to help clarify as other comments also appear to get this wrong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smithfield,_London#Market
Apparently the plans to build the new market have fallen through
> The decision to close the markets and offer traders compensation was made by the Corporation's Court of Common Council.
It seems that they want to close the markets, not to move them
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black%E2%80%93Scholes_model
Subsets of culture are preserved, packetized & traded daily. Even StubHub has a "food festival" category.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Bridge_(Lake_Havasu_Cit...
Currently, the Magna Carta. Clause 9, dating from 1297:
THE City of London shall have all the old Liberties and Customs which it hath been used to have. Moreover We will and grant, that all other Cities, Boroughs, Towns, and the Barons of the Five Ports, and all other Ports, shall have all their Liberties and free Customs.
This clause has never been repealed.
But there were other forms of royal charter at least as far back as the Norman conquest, and probably before.
Not everything from the past is good. We don’t still run coal power plants in London just to get that historic smog.
They were already planning to move both markets way out of central London (to a place no-one but a local would ever go) this is just changing it to not providing a new site.
Just because most Londoners don't care doesn't make them unimportant. They can provide a useful 'infrastructure' role for allowing this specific sector to run more smoothly.
There's a similar thing in Toronto, the Ontario Food Terminal, that allows various local businesses (restaurants, local grocers / veg stands, (neighbourhood) florists, etc) buy directly from producers without having to go through a middle-man:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_Food_Terminal
There was some worry that the facility would be retired and the land (e.g.) used for housing, but there are no plans to get rid of or relocate it:
* https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-food-terminal...
* https://farmtario.com/news/ontario-food-terminal-distributes...
Given that Toronto is the largest city in Canada, it allows for a somewhat convenient location for producers to sell to a large amount of buyers in a concentrated space.
> […] and require major financial support.
Running a modern society requires major financial support. The question is: what are the benefits to society of the infrastructure in question? Are the vendors not charged rent? Are the buyers perhaps not charged a membership fee? At least when it comes to OpEx do annual fees not cover expenses? The above mentioned Ontario Food Terminal is self-sufficient from fees (perhaps the government helps out every so often with CapEx?).
> The whole operation is overseen by the Ontario Food Terminal Board.. $8 million of expenses... with a revenue rate exceeding that by $1 million, the operation is profitable, self-sustaining and receives no government support or preferential treatment despite its status as an agency of the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs.. Some of those that operate here are among the wealthiest families in Canada.. The thirty-year leases held by the most powerful grocers in the city are renewable in perpetuity, privileging a small number of family-owned businesses that have kept a tight hold on their terminal rights for over three generations. The business is so robust, and the leases are so sought after, that each one is estimated to be worth over a million dollars in annual economic returns.
I personally know someone who has a business license and goes to the OTF for stuff. Once a year my mom tags along so she can get Christmas flowers at wholesale prices (you just have to show up at 3AM for good selection):
I've bought some of the best seafood I've ever eaten from Billingsgate. I remember picking up some fresh scallops still covered in mud that were the plumpest sweetest scallops. My mother was in awe of how fresh they were
Have you found anything like what it was for meat and produce? Maltby is great for street food but I mean actual raw ingredients. Yes there are some great butchers but Borough was great for everything in one place.
Aside from Michelin star places chefs don't go around buying anything the whole ordering is highly automated.
Smithfield, at least to me, always had a different vibe; more pro-to-pro/business-to-business, but also they deliver or commission to pre order there; different from Billingsgate.
I mean, or Tesco?
I usually hear about this in the US, I can't recall a lot of UK examples, but I think we have it here.
After referencing my corporatese translation book, I believe this means "Traders can get fucked we have money to make."
I note the haughty remarks of other commenters who are neither familiar with the area or the ability to read, and suggest they pay a virtual visit to the spots in question
It's a lovely area, and home to one of my favourite restaurants, St Johns.
Either are cool, although I like the image of you running through the actual market like Rocky Balboa in the meat locker or something
Bourdain was a great pal and admirer, describing him as 'the most influential chef of the last two decades'
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/aug/17/st-john...
I have a proof, too long to be contained within the margins of this page, that when supply goes up, price goes down
Most respectfully and deferentially, I don't think "more things available makes price goes down" is a platitude or textbook or academic thing!
I must confess, the fact this Fat Tony logic and not some theory invented in an academic textbook ivory-tower divorced-from-reality impoverished-intellectual safe haven is why I cannot provide a proof: the note about the margin was an attempt to inject some levity, via a reference to Fermat!
Great! Start paying attention to real estate and rental prices in areas near "mixed use" development projects and urban multi-story housing construction, literally the projects that are billed by politicians as addressing housing shortages and you'll find my point bore out pretty plainly.
> I don't think "more things available makes price goes down" is a platitude or textbook or academic thing!
It isn't in the context of bulk commodities and raw inputs where producers compete solely on volume. Housing is not a volume market and no incentives exist for developers or property owners to make it one. See also: RealPage sued for enabling market collusion in residential rental rates: https://www.politico.com/news/2024/08/23/feds-sue-software-c...
I'm honestly kinda upset you didn't have anything backing up that idea. I genuinely expect better from HN, and genuinely believed that maybe I had missed something at 35, after an econ degree before promoting getting into programming. I wouldn't have given the benefit of the doubt on any other site, and certainly not if you weren't as well spoken as you are.
I can't believe you're throwing out RealPage intros after sneering at me about entry level econ.
Buddy I knew RealPage, intimately, years ago and nothing in the story has anything to say about prices always go up. In fact, the existence of the story requires the opposite
Building the high end and having people move up helps with the high cost of construction also.
The marginal utility for the general person of a public market seems higher than that of a couple extra housing units
I know of trader who left London to work in Dubai to still take his Russian clients business, and apparently all Russian money is going there instead of London.
Our reward would be a bacon/sausage and egg butty and a stiff cup of builder's tea.
Good times
> Chris Hayward, policy chairman of the City of London Corporation, said the > decision represented a "positive new chapter" for the markets as it "empowers > traders to build a sustainable future in premises that align with their > long-term business goals".
This is a great statement. Like firing people to free them up to find jobs that better align with their desire for employment.
Gotta hit those eco numbers.
The Corporation is essentially a unitary/borough-tier local authority, overseeing the "square mile" centre of the city, and has a council of elected councilmen. It provides housing, education, social services, street cleaning, markets etc for a small area of central London, and has existed since time immemorial.
The Mayor's remit, which has only existed since the year 2000, covers the whole 600-square mile area of Greater London, and provides strategic services like transport, strategic planning, fire and rescue, and the metropolitan police.
The Mayor of London wouldn't have had any involvement in this at all.
as a business voter I went to my ward's annual meeting (wardmote), they were surprised to see a non-resident there
nearly the entire thing was about issues residents care about (late noise, cycle paths, petty crime, etc)
that and their amazing new plans for billingsgate/smithfield
the other are a couple of other things to remember about City ward lists:
1. employers have no involvement other than picking their voters -- it's up to the individuals
2. due to the allocation rules: micro-businesses have most of the votes, so small food vendors have significantly more votes than all the large businesses
Significantly as I noted in my original comment the transit from outside the CoL into the market, but also directly.
I mean uh. Come work for us / hire us, we're the best at what we do! Honest! AI!
There are two quite different possible interpretations for that fact pattern.
But the English of late are exceptionally good at bending over and showing their rear-ends to new foreign overlords for paltry sums of coin.
Nah. In China there wouldn't even be an announcement, you'd just turn up one day and it would be gone.
Tokyo famously redeveloped their fish market, and that was far more of a piece of popular heritage than either of the markets mentioned here.
This is no different from what happened to Covent Garden 40 years ago, and no-one sane wishes we'd kept that as a fruit and veg market.
Sociopath, well. The world is cruel, including for children.
> "Positive new chapter" = "We're closing this place down".
> "Empower traders" = "Kick them out".
> "Sustainable future" = "Nowhere to go".
> "Financial support and guidance" = "Good luck, you're on your own".
> "Unlock the huge potential" = "We'll figure something out, maybe".
tldr from bsremover too:
Smithfield: Big meat market, been there since 1860s. Billingsgate: Huge fish market, been there since 1327, now moving to make way for homes.
So a real state take over, pretty much?
Write your MP.
A healthy economy is one where money, people, skills, and intellectual property has high velocity, meaning people quickly reorient their productive capacity to where it's most useful.
Well, this would all be true if the UK wasn't going through a lost generation economically. Serves them right for Brexit!
Everyone is an interchangeable cog!
> Serves them right for Brexit!
Brexit wasn’t a unanimous vote. There are people suffering under the Brexit decision that couldn’t vote at the time.
You should look into Mark Fischer as an example of someone who tried to see just how evil it is in its full glory. Look at what happened to him afterwards. That's what happens when you think about it too much.
Unironically, swim with the fish or you'll get eaten by the sharks.
It is, of course, the system favored in the West and evident touted as the "best system".
Being 'best' of course does not necessarily make it good. Large groups of people are easily swayed based on fear, anger, perception, rhetoric and so on. The implications of each policy are seldom evaluated in the cold light of day.
So yes, the British voted for brexit- that is democracy in action. Majority Rules - so whining about being in the minority is irrelevant - the system is literally based on "majority rules".
Same thing in the US now. A president has been elected where he has specific points of action. The majority voted for those points of action. The people have spoken. Those policies are not secret. They have been publically explained to anyone who cared to listen.
It's not necessary to blame foreign agents. The decision lay with the electorate, and the electorate have spoken. It is the very core of democracy that those votes be respected and acted on. Uou want to leave Europe? Fine. Is it monumentally stupid? Absolutely. But democracy does not require "good" decisions, only popular ones.
And before the US folk get smug, tarrifs are coming to drive up prices. That is quite literally what the people have voted for. I have no doubt this will reinvigorate the local manufacturing industry. The next VC target will be steel.
For example, Trump distanced himself from Project 2025. Now the people he has selected for his government are from Heritage Foundation and all that.
Furthermore, he incited a coup yet still is going to sit on a throne. That is not democracy in my book.
Personally I think people are plenty intelligent. (OK, there are a few morons, and they get good TV time, but for the most part people are smart enough.)
Blaming the electorate is not victim blaming. Since they hold the power they can't be victims.
It is the goal, and function, of politicians to persuade the people. If the people choose to follow one source of media, that is up to them.
Trumps lies are easily debunked to anyone who cares. Lots of voters don't care that he lies. Lots of voters believe whatever they want. Democracy, as a system of govt explicitly puts the power in these peoples hands. That's not a bug, it's the killer feature.
Trump was very clear in his goals. Tarrifs, deportation, abortion ban, IVF under threat. No support for Ukraine. 100% for Israel, pro Palestinian support suppressed. Ignore climate change. Demonize minorities. He ran on these policies, the majority voted for them, he'll do what they asked for.
Look, all systems are fine and dandy when the politicians have good intentions. Equally all systems fail when bad actors come onto the stage. But hey, democracy is the best option right?
Keeping these is a strategic good for the country.
I live in Portugal now, but those times are so vivid. Whenever I was at the office very early, or out parting late enough, the sight of the market workers there was sobering and down to earth.
To think of it not being there, then being replaced with something nondescript, is shameful.
In and around is Farringdon Station, one of the original Tube stations, the bars & pubs (Ye Olde Mitre, The Hope, Fox & Anchor, Smiths of Smithfield, etc.) and clubs (including Fabric).
I was working in the offices above the markets, for a nascent IT company, and believe me they weren't luxurious offices but it was exciting.
Good times, and soon only memories.
My friend had a pub next to Smithfield so I used to be down there a lot but the meat market is mostly slabs of meat and associated body parts, diesel trucks and closed to the public. It seemed a little out of place in gentrified modern London.
Most startups moved out to WeWork as soon as they could turn a profit. But hey, it was cheap office space in super-central London.
In Sydney, the current Fish Market is a grotty assemblage of small warehouses in what's now a prime waterfront location of the city that has become an unlikely tourist attraction, but still serves the wholesale market. They're building a new one right next to it that looks far nicer, leaves tourists much less at risk of getting impaled by a speeding forklift, and will keep the wholesalers around for at least some time since they've been promised fixed rents for the next X years: https://newsydneyfishmarket.insw.com/insw/new-sydney-fish-ma...
All other markets, though, have been shipped off to a massive complex in the industrial suburbs, designed for wholesalers with easy truck access, and with the arguable exception of Paddy's Markets (which mostly sells junk to tourists) there's not a single proper consumer retail market in the entire city. Meanwhile, over in Melbourne, there's a whole slew of them (Queen Vic, Prahran, Footscray etc) that all appear to be thriving.
The thing about markets like this is that once they're gone, you can never get them back again. My home town, Wellington, shut down the markets at some point in the distant past and have been trying to restart them in the more recent past to little success (think a bunch of cars parked in an uncovered car park trying to sell vegetables).
Yes, come to the museum to learn about all this culture we used to have, such as an awesome market.
Of course, he had no concept of the circulation of money as being interesting and important to the “health” of a city, but most economists since Marx do.
As the Elizabeth Line was being finished I realised that the whole area around there is going to change hugely.
Mind you if that’s the case the station would need to be rebuilt.
The article discusses converting the market to a social space to make the most of the new Museum of London.
Am I missing something, I would have thought the new Museum of London would open as the Old one closed, not a year or so later.
And how on Earth is a new market in Dagenham spec’d as costing a large fraction of a billion quid?
Partly cost disease, partly just that even Dagenham is expensive these days.
This is the machine winning.
To second order(s) and above, erasing culture reduces the desire of folks to live and prosper in the first place.
Everybody and their uncle bitched and moaned about it, but I think there are few people today who would argue that London would be better off if Covent Garden was still the central produce market rather than the touristic hellhole it is today.
Think of it as encouragement to the traders to find their own new location :)
Many of them will simply retire, one trader is quoted as saying. Sounds like the Costa del Sol and Canary Islands are about to get a large influx of cockney butchers.
First they entice you with a vision of a place where everything is within walking distance, then they do this.
I'm complaining about places to go within walking distance, such as this market, being removed despite declarations from the city authorities that they're making the place more liveable.
The connection here is that restaurants are part of the appeal of walkable cities and now their life will be made harder. Net effect will of course be an increase in prices.
You need places like these in a city because they shoulder a huge burden, namely logistics, which are particularly hard in densely populated areas.
> £8
Bloody hell...
It's not Greggs prices, but I'd like to try it at least once. It looks like it closes at 8am though.
When the Tsukiji fish market was still open to unescorted tourists there were many of these pocket eateries, I ate in one that was the size of a large closet, guests sat elbow to elbow, you can't lean back without bumping into another person who has lined up behind you to claim your seat when you're done. Clam broth, raw fish, chased with a beer, all before 6AM.
Including that William (Braveheart) Wallace was hung, drawn and quartered there in 1305.
In America, we do this by running our ports artisanally. Residents of this nation pay billions for the privilege of 50,000 manually handling containers in the old way: refined, traditional and not by soulless automation. England would do well to learn from our dedication to the past.
It's prime real estate land, possibly the best plot in London right now. And so is Smithfield, or at least the land that Museum of London is on, and they're moving to Smithfield. For a while I expect.
The whole thing is just short term profiteering over tradition and a rich history. Some things need preserving.
Some things do. But is this one of them? The article doesn't make a great case.
And building something new here won't necessarily be short-term.
> Picture yourself waking up to stunning city views, stepping out into a thriving community of boutique shops and artisanal eateries—all just steps from your front door. With thoughtfully designed interiors, cutting-edge amenities, and the character of a bygone era lovingly preserved, Fish Market Flats is more than a place to live—it’s a lifestyle, a legacy, and the future of urban living.
> Don’t miss your chance to be part of this extraordinary transformation. Fish Market Flats: Where History Finds Its New Home. Reserve your slice of history today!
Mostly because modern cities only allow the most boring, safe things to be built. Less people would be whining if it was possible to build a thriving market like this elsewhere in the city, where it still makes economic sense. But there's probably a billion rules and therefore capital/political requirements where it's impossible. So the only contenders will be a bigco shopping market on the bottom floor of a condo building.
Open, chaotic markets with multiple small vendors is too risky (and too much fun) for modern top-down urban planners... so people see the only solution is to cling on to the dwindling past when that was still possible.
The brief history of the area:
- Isle of Dogs, London, was the main docks area, which shutdown through the 1960s and 1970s due to standard sized containers and automation.
- 1982 Billingsgate moves to Isle of Dogs. There's nothing else there. Docks are closed. Land is cheap, and the site is easily accessible from the East for sellers, and from the West for buyers (London restaurants etc.).
- Creation of the London Docklands Development Corporation (LDDC) in 1981 and the granting of Urban Enterprise Zone status to the Isle of Dogs in 1982, starts the conversion of the old docks into the new business zone
- From the 90s onwards CSFB, BarCap, MS, Citi, HSBC all move to Canary Wharf
- Property and land prices are now vastly higher.
- 2022ish, Crossrail opens. Land prices and property prices increase even more.
Corporation of London has long realised it's sitting on a gold mine: the land north of the North Dock is Billingsgate
We have converted many Victorian train stations into car parks, public baths and lidos into car parks, and excellent examples of Georgian and Elizabethan architecture into car parks. Even Stonehenge is a drive-by attraction and car park, now.
The bank accounts of the wealthy?
Loads of examples of markets turned to food and culture markets both in London and other places.. Lisbon, Stockholm, etc.. and they are thriving!
Smithfield’s in particular is better as a new home for the London museum and probably more office/retail buildings than a poorly located commercial meat market
Newsflash: It's always been about the money. I first went to Canary Wharf in 1995, a friend bought a small house there and it was a shitty place. I visited him again in 2001 and the place had changed "a lot". I ended up living in the same area for a few years around 2017, and CW has nothing from 'that' time. Back then you could buy land/a house at a (considering today's prices) 'cheap'. Now every square meter is worth plenty of Latinum. So yeah, this part (market) could be 'repurposed for luxury offices, luxury homes, etc and whoever owns it can have a x20 return, so why not..?
For example: https://dm1igrl0afsra.cloudfront.net/AcuCustom/Sitename/DAM/...
And it's depended on by all the fine food fish restaurants, including all the sushi ones.
In December 2012, following criticism that it was insufficiently transparent about its finances, the City of London Corporation revealed that its "City's Cash" account – an endowment fund built up over the past 800 years that it says is used "for the benefit of London as a whole"[51] – holds more than £1.3bn. As of March 2016, it had net assets of £2.3bn.[52] The fund collects money made from the corporation's property and investment earnings.[53]
> Initially the Corporation had planned to move both markets as well as New Spitalfields in Leyton to a £1bn purpose-built site in Dagenham, however this was dropped earlier this month over cost concerns as the council had already spent £308m purchasing and remediating the site in Dagenham.
They were going to spend half their entire endowment on this! And, regardless of whether you have the money to spare, £1bn is an absolutely colossal amount to spend on a market (even a large and very historic one). It just makes no financial sense at all.
Paris closed Les Halles in 1973.[1]
New York's Fulton Fish Market moved in 2005.[2]
A wholesale food market is a transportation hub. It needs good road access. If you can't easily get semitrailer trucks to it, it's in the wrong place. At one time Smithfield was served by underground freight rail, but that shut down long ago. Smithfield has a setup where maybe eight semis can parallel park on the street and back up to loading docks. Hunts Point Market in New York has space for over a thousand.
It's the end of an era, though. One of the last of the big public markets.
Next you'll be telling me that you use that new fangled electricity for lights, rather than candles!