London's 850-year-old food markets to close
314 points by kepler471 7 days ago | 277 comments
  • cjs_ac 7 days ago |
    > The decision to close the markets and offer traders compensation was made by the Corporation's Court of Common Council.

    > 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.

    • orra 7 days ago |
      Why meet your legal obligations if you have a chance of deleting the obligations instead? Absolute chancers.
      • labster 7 days ago |
        Why stop there? Why not revoke the City’s charter altogether?
        • philipwhiuk 7 days ago |
          The City of London isn't legally reliant on a charter. It draws existence from 'Time Immemorial'.

          Specifically it exists because it existed before 1189

          • zzbn00 6 days ago |
            This is a good and subtle point of law -- The City of London is a corporation "by prescription".

            But while it was created by neither statue nor royal charter, I doubt the parliament could not end it if it so decided....

          • bradleyjg 6 days ago |
            The King-in-Parliament can abrogate common law.
    • philipwhiuk 7 days ago |
      > The Parliamentary Bill may very well not pass, in which case the Corporation may be in something of a pickle.

      I think it's highly unlikely that it would fail.

      • moomin 7 days ago |
        True, but it would definitely be funny.
    • walrus01 7 days ago |
      > the local government authority for the City of London, which is only the part of London that is within the walls of Roman Londinium

      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/...

      • qingcharles 7 days ago |
        The City of London (aka the Square Mile) is literally a world unto itself. Even the Mayor of London is not the mayor of the City of London.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London

        • cjrp 6 days ago |
          Separate police force too.
          • actionfromafar 6 days ago |
            And in elections, corporations have a vote. Corporation votes vastly outnumber human resident votes.
            • vidarh 6 days ago |
              Though they're outnumbered in large part because almost nobody lives in City of London.
        • vinay427 6 days ago |
          That seems incorrect. The mayor is the mayor of Greater London which includes the City of London, although the City also has a Lord Mayor, as London boroughs have elected or ceremonial mayors. In other words, the City has its own mayor in the sense that other parts of London have their own sub-governments, although with a few differences such as policing and city status.

          > 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.

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_London

          • qingcharles 6 days ago |
            Appreciate the clarification!
        • pjbster 6 days ago |
          I recommend the book Treasure Islands by Nicholas Shaxson. It covers offshore tax havens and the central role played by the City in facilitating capital flight and tax avoidance. Chapter 12 is devoted entirely to the City of London Corporation.

          Haven't read it for a while but I do recall the word "strange" appearing a lot.

        • surfingdino 6 days ago |
          They even have their own mission to the EU so they don't have to rely on the UK government to discuss matters that matter to the City of London https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/supporting-businesses/global...

          Think of it as a vertical, focused embassy

      • tim333 6 days ago |
        I'm not sure that much is down to the old City of London as opposed to London as a whole. Most of the property buying mentioned in those articles is in Kensington and Chelsea. Even the Guardian says City of London but when they quote the guy with quotation marks it's "40% of that money comes through London and overseas territories and crown dependencies".

        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.

    • danans 7 days ago |
      FTFY

      > The Parliamentary Bill may very well not pass, in which case the Corporation may be in something of a pickled herring.

  • hi_hi 7 days ago |
    This makes me deeply sad. I use to live near to the market on St Johns Street, which is a direct route to the Smithfield. There was once a burst water main that serviced a nearby hospital that caused St Johns Street to be closed down as the flood uncovered bones which needed to be excavated and investigated. They eventually were identified as cattle bones which were a few hundred years old, from when the road was nothing but dirt and would have hundreds of animals pass along it on the way to the market for sale and slaughter.

    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.

    • lmm 6 days ago |
      The commercial interests are downstream of very real human wants and needs. London is in a housing crisis.
    • interludead 5 days ago |
      It’s hard not to feel cynical when these decisions so often seem driven by commercial interests
  • paxys 7 days ago |
    > The original market first traded in Lower Thames Street in the City in 1327, before moving to its current site in Poplar, east London, in 1982.

    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.

    • cjs_ac 7 days ago |
      The market as an institution is 850 years old; the building that currently houses that institution is 42 years old. The market is not a place; it is the activity in which people engage in that place.
      • dgfitz 7 days ago |
        And no laws or legislation have been passed or proposed to close down said institution, is that accurate?
        • peteri 7 days ago |
          As far as I'm aware they do need an act of parliment to close it down. The one to create the market on the current site is an Act of Parliament (The Metropolitan Meat and Poultry Market Act of 1860) which should protect the site from becoming anything but a place to provide Meat & Poultry
          • dgfitz 7 days ago |
            “It” meaning the market or the institution?
        • ericjmorey 7 days ago |
          They are in the process of absolving their legal obligation to continue operating the market.
          • dgfitz 7 days ago |
            So the market moved 40ish years ago, and now it has to move again, the institution is fine?
            • bobthepanda 7 days ago |
              No, if you read the article, the City of London is washing its hands of having to relocate the institution at all.
    • hi_hi 7 days ago |
      No, this was a bit confusing. I think this may have been talking about Billingsgate, the fish market. Smithfields is a meat market, and has been at that site in one form or another for hundreds of years.

      Edit, to help clarify as other comments also appear to get this wrong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smithfield,_London#Market

      • justincormack 6 days ago |
        Yes, the original fish market building is an events dpace now I think.
    • __oh_es 7 days ago |
      https://archive.is/eX3Q6

      Apparently the plans to build the new market have fallen through

    • throwaway494932 7 days ago |
      > and will likely continue to operate from a different location

      > 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

  • walterbell 7 days ago |
    Need a City quant PhD to invent a mathematical analog of Black-Scholes [1] for pricing and trading the irreplaceable value of culturally significant physical spaces to future generations. Then City-like [2] institutions can compete financially for ongoing preservation rights, rather than a one-time chop shop auction.

    [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black%E2%80%93Scholes_model

    [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London

    • sdwr 7 days ago |
      "Preserving the irreplaceable value of ..." works great as a personal motivation or a mission statement, but terribly as an explicit rule. It's the same problem as carbon offsets - if there's a formula for converting intangible values into cold hard cash, people will exploit the definition of the intangibles to make money.
      • roughly 7 days ago |
        This is largely because we’ve built a philosophy that eschews any concept of a collective or a people or a culture or a future.
        • lobsterthief 6 days ago |
          Not every country is like this
        • contravariant 6 days ago |
          People keep forgetting that money is just a set of rules we've created for ourselves and not a goal on its own.
      • walterbell 7 days ago |
        Which legal and financial instruments have defended the City of London itself from being auctioned for parts?

        Subsets of culture are preserved, packetized & traded daily. Even StubHub has a "food festival" category.

        • metaphor 7 days ago |
          Before learning that this[1] was a thing, I honestly would have interpreted your remark in passing as figurative rhetoric.

          [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Bridge_(Lake_Havasu_Cit...

        • mr_toad 5 days ago |
          > Which legal and financial instruments have defended the City of London itself from being auctioned for parts?

          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.

    • cactusfrog 7 days ago |
      This is a gamblers ruin problem action.
    • tempusalaria 6 days ago |
      The reality is that these are not culturally significant institutions and most people in London don’t care. Ordinary Londoners rarely use these markets, and they mostly sell to restaurants, and require major financial support.

      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.

      • throw0101a 6 days ago |
        > The reality is that these are not culturally significant institutions and most people in London don’t care. Ordinary Londoners rarely use these markets, and they mostly sell to restaurants […]

        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?).

        • walterbell 6 days ago |
          https://www.blogto.com/eat_drink/2007/10/inside_the_ontario_...

          > 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.

          • throw0101a 5 days ago |
            The fact that the major grocers in Canada is an oligopoly is separate issue from the efficiency of having a market like the OTF.

            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):

            * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poinsettia

      • Earw0rm 6 days ago |
        Mostly agree, Londoners go to Borough if they're rich or the many local farmer's markets on the weekend. You'd have to admit, the not providing a new site thing is kind of shoddy though?
        • djtango 6 days ago |
          Borough market is for tourists. (although one of my must-eat places for all of London is there)

          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

          • Earw0rm 4 days ago |
            Sadly increasingly so re Borough. Used to be great.

            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.

      • Yeul 6 days ago |
        The reality is that the restaurant food is brought by trucks from warehouses. There are special companies that specialise in providing everything that a restaurant needs.

        Aside from Michelin star places chefs don't go around buying anything the whole ordering is highly automated.

        • briandear 6 days ago |
          There are over 80 Michelin Star places in London. Not a small number of restaurants. Not to mention hundreds more that aspire to get a star and care deeply about being Michelin-level quality.
        • fch42 5 days ago |
          Visiting Billingsgate will teach you that quite a few restaurant folks (and quite a few "normal people") shop there, in addition to (smaller) fish traders.

          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.

      • FiniteField 6 days ago |
        Most people in London don't care because they are not English and have no connection with the thousands of years of history the city and country have. Only a third of the population has any connection at all to the London of the 1950s, never mind the 1100s. They are not stakeholders in its heritage, the explanation is as simple as that.
        • lmm 6 days ago |
          Nah. Even people who've lived in London for generations don't care if they're not in the food industry. Why would they?
          • walterbell 5 days ago |
            Are they unaffected by the efficiency of London food supply chains?
            • lmm 13 hours ago |
              I don't see anything in the article claiming this will damage the efficiency of London's food supply chains; indeed I wouldn't be surprised if it improved them.
      • stuaxo 5 days ago |
        A lot of Londoners eat in those same restaurants though.
  • petesergeant 7 days ago |
    > "It means there’s no fish market for London, which would mean the populace of London would have to resort to using local fishmongers"

    I mean, or Tesco?

    • shermantanktop 7 days ago |
      Which many people call “Tesco’s” for some reason. I had to read your comment twice to spot the issue.
      • timthorn 7 days ago |
        Because the name is a contraction of T. E. Stockwell and Jack Cohen.
      • asveikau 6 days ago |
        There is a tendency to make store names possessive even if they aren't.

        I usually hear about this in the US, I can't recall a lot of UK examples, but I think we have it here.

        • petesergeant 5 days ago |
          I had a chat with ChatGPT earlier who said much the same thing, but I was unconvinced by any of the examples other than Marks and Spencer(s). I think Tescos just feels nicer to say?
    • surfingdino 6 days ago |
      What local fishmongers? Where I live in East London there are only a handful left. None exist anywhere near new residential developments.
  • ToucanLoucan 7 days ago |
    > "empowers traders to build a sustainable future in premises that align with their long-term business goals"

    After referencing my corporatese translation book, I believe this means "Traders can get fucked we have money to make."

  • vr46 7 days ago |
    Super sad, have spent a long of time in the area from riding right through the middle of it and parking my motorbike under it, to wolfing Turkish lunches and drinking in the pubs (not on the same day, drink-driving mavens). It is a bit of anomaly in the modern London, hard to get to and surrounded by roads that aren’t really fit for purpose anymore, but it’s these incongruous spots that make things interesting. I remember the butcher on the main Farringdon Road just near the Charterhouse St junction, who was somewhat of a character, scoffing at my suggestion that he would even consider buying meat from Smithfield - literally around the corner - which confused and amused me at the same time.

    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

    • hi_hi 7 days ago |
      My running route would take me through the market in the mornings, only a few hours after it had closed up. I loved the smell of meat, which others would find quite offensive.

      It's a lovely area, and home to one of my favourite restaurants, St Johns.

      • vr46 7 days ago |
        Did you run through Buyers Walk right inside the building, or do you mean Grand Ave, the short and often slippery vehicular road that cut the building in half?

        Either are cool, although I like the image of you running through the actual market like Rocky Balboa in the meat locker or something

        • hi_hi 7 days ago |
          Yeah, Grand Ave I think, it was in the afternoons or evenings mostly, so everything was well cleaned up by then. No stopping to punch a meat carcass unfortunately :)
      • piltdownman 6 days ago |
        Not only is it home to St.John's as a restaurant, it is a geographical catalyst to a whole slow-food movement based on the food-markets proximity and the usage of offal and bone marrow by the gentleman and genius, Fergus Henderson.

        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...

        • justincormack 6 days ago |
          Not sure he buys from the market though.
    • shermantanktop 7 days ago |
      I worked literally around the corner from there some years ago. Watch “Slow Horses” and you’ll see all those sights, including Barbican tube stop and its pedestrian bridge, Charterhouse square benches, the brutalist towers, my work’s favorite little pub, etc.
    • interludead 5 days ago |
      Those kinds of spots (places that are a bit rough around the edges but full of personality) are what make cities like London so special
  • nothercastle 7 days ago |
    Real estate developer looking to build build flats for Chinese and Russian investors. Gotta love the grift
    • refulgentis 7 days ago |
      Oh no, that'd be awful...but good news, I just looked into it, no China/Russia investors! It's a real estate developer working with the people to get a bunch of units built to ease a historic shortage. Huzzah!
      • forgetfreeman 7 days ago |
        There's a billion dollar price tag being punted around and you think the resulting development is going to be aimed at and priced to reduce a housing supply shortage? Are you by chance on the market to buy a bridge?
        • nothercastle 7 days ago |
          Trump tower 2.0 London Edition?
        • refulgentis 7 days ago |
          I know I'm supposed to say no, but...yes I do believe it.

          I have a proof, too long to be contained within the margins of this page, that when supply goes up, price goes down

          • forgetfreeman 7 days ago |
            Go for it. Econ 100 textbook bs about supply and demand are trivially dismissed by a casual examination of housing and rental prices in the US in gentrified areas. What happens when the real world intrudes on academic platitudes is rather straightforward: pricing for everything goes up and the folks who were struggling get pushed out. Nobody who couldn't afford housing in the market before the shift is served.
            • refulgentis 7 days ago |
              I'm more than open to reading anything about that! Literally anything!

              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!

              • forgetfreeman 6 days ago |
                > I'm more than open to reading anything about that! Literally anything!

                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...

                • refulgentis 6 days ago |
                  Ah okay, you made it up :)
                  • forgetfreeman 6 days ago |
                    Uh no, I'm watching it play out in realtime in local real estate markets. It's fucking with my retirement plans.
                    • refulgentis 6 days ago |
                      I hate to be rude, but, whether or not your retirement plan is going to plan has nothing to do with whether more housing makes prices go up.

                      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

                      • forgetfreeman 6 days ago |
                        You're arguing from a point of something you read. I'm arguing from a point of a market that I'm heavily invested in and monitoring daily. Get back to me when you've got a couple mil parked in residential real estate in a market where the kinds of development projects you're trying to provide cover for have been commonplace for a decade. I'll wait. Spoiler: you're going to find that both rents and purchase price both skyrocket.
        • Sabinus 7 days ago |
          Luxury apartments do reduce the housing shortage. Cashed up boomers can move out of the nice family home they've been living in since the kids left and upgrade/downsize.

          Building the high end and having people move up helps with the high cost of construction also.

          • mikeyouse 7 days ago |
            The general phenomenon is well known to those who study this kind of thing, but yep, building housing of any price helps reduce costs overall:

            https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filtering_(housing)

            • nothercastle 7 days ago |
              Depends on if people live in it or buy as an investment and leave it vacant or air bb as often happens in London
              • mikeyouse 7 days ago |
                Not really since those people would otherwise some different existing property to do the same thing with.
                • nothercastle 6 days ago |
                  I’m not going argue that that basic Econ does not indicate that this should help a bit with housing demand. The question is how much and is it really worth loosing a public institution for.

                  The marginal utility for the general person of a public market seems higher than that of a couple extra housing units

        • runako 7 days ago |
          They're saying "thousands of new homes." If they can build that many homes for a billion dollars, that doesn't sound like its' all luxury housing.
      • illwrks 6 days ago |
        There is no way in hell anything built there will be for normal people. That area is on the doorstep of the City, with excellent connections, it’s like the centre of a compass transport wise. When completed, you can bet it will be 2m+ for a shoebox sized apartment, with yearly fees that would swallow any normal persons salary.
    • Winblows11 7 days ago |
      Is there any Russian money going to UK/London anymore? Or any that wasn't frozen/sanctioned that hasn't already left.

      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.

      • teractiveodular 7 days ago |
        No Russian money, no sirree. Fortunately there's still plenty of housing designed to appeal to Russian-speaking investors holding passports from Vanuatu, Cyprus or St Kitts and Nevis and fat investment trusts in the Cayman Islands.
  • johnzim 7 days ago |
    What a shame. On a few occasions my wife and I woke up at ridiculous o'clock and made our way down to Billingsgate market on the underground. We'd come back with fish and a big salmon in a black bin-bag, which I'd do a progressively less horrific job of filleting each time.

    Our reward would be a bacon/sausage and egg butty and a stiff cup of builder's tea.

    Good times

    • astrosi 7 days ago |
      Agreed, one of my great pleasures during COVID when I had terrible insomnia and couldn't sleep was to cycle down to Billingsgate in the morning and eat one of the fantastic bacon and scallop rolls from the cafe in the market. Definitely going to miss the place.
      • walthamstow 7 days ago |
        I had honestly made my peace with it moving to Dagenham. It makes sense for the Farringdon area, it makes sense for transport links, it even makes sense for the traders, who mostly live out that way. To close the existing markets without building a new one is cultural vandalism.
    • interludead 5 days ago |
      That sounds like a proper adventure
  • sandworm101 7 days ago |
    An old tradition is to be replaced with the current hot trend: selling condos as investment assets. But land speculation and development predates everything in london.
  • alexwasserman 7 days ago |
    Statement from the City of London Corporation which is closing them down:

    > 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.

    • hardlianotion 7 days ago |
      Who doesn’t love corporate bullshit?
      • smartbit 7 days ago |
        I love the journalist who puts these quotes at the end of the article. Great journalism.
        • sosborn 6 days ago |
          Journalists take glee in letting the fools expose themselves.
      • randomcarbloke 6 days ago |
        the ruling comes from up-on-high the mayor of London who does have some oversight over the city of london, and the transit of traders that utilise the market.

        Gotta hit those eco numbers.

        • jayelbe 6 days ago |
          The Mayor of London doesn't have any power over the City of London Corporation. They are completely separate authorities.

          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.

          • wbl 6 days ago |
            Not to be confused with the Lord Mayor of London.
            • asveikau 6 days ago |
              I think a lot of people who don't know much about London are surprised that the City of London is quite small and not what people generally mean when they say "London".
              • Angostura 6 days ago |
                AKA "The Square Mile"
          • dghf 6 days ago |
            Fun fact, the City of London is the last local authority in the UK where businesses as well residents get to vote. Businesses can appoint one voter for every five employees up to 50, and then one per 50 employees after that.
            • rvense 6 days ago |
              Do you know how that adds up, what the ratio of business votes to residential votes is? I imagine many more people work in the city than live there.
              • blibble 6 days ago |
                there are more business votes, but practically very few people actually use their business vote

                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
            • randomcarbloke 4 hours ago |
              Fun fact, comments like this give me the impression this place is turning into reddit.
          • randomcarbloke 4 hours ago |
            this is actually a common misconception, since the GLA controls the LLDC, TFL, and LFC it has enormous influence on the square mile.

            Significantly as I noted in my original comment the transit from outside the CoL into the market, but also directly.

    • roughly 7 days ago |
      Christ, yeah - I came here to post the same quote. What kind of horrific shit does one need to go through in life to become capable of uttering that kind of horseshit with a straight face?
      • lazide 7 days ago |
        If you knew, you’d likely never be able to leave the house. Or could never go home again.
      • gyomu 7 days ago |
        Maybe we shouldn’t be casting stones from the HN glass house, because literally every other startup here has a mission statement that sounds as ridiculous as this
        • boingo 6 days ago |
          The C-Suite coming up with this garbage is in every industry. You notice it more with tech companies on HN because that's the industry we usually focus on
        • seizethecheese 6 days ago |
          Arguably, startups should have absurd mission statements, while managers of the city of London should be more sober.
          • dylan604 6 days ago |
            A sober Englishman? Is there such a thing?
            • n4r9 6 days ago |
              Bit unfair. Plenty of sober Englishman. During the week, anyway. Well, Monday to Thursday. Before midday, at least.
              • gerdesj 6 days ago |
                Before breakfast. 'spoons opens quite early in the morning for a reason ...
          • no_wizard 6 days ago |
            Wait why should startups have absurd mission statements? That doesn’t make sense to me
            • pmontra 6 days ago |
              They shouldn't but they do. Making the world a better place is not what founders have in mind. What they have in mind is "we are looking for an exit and retire young", for nearly all of them. Unfortunately those words are not something they can write in a mission statement so they must be creative.
              • Cthulhu_ 5 days ago |
                Not just startups, this cognitive dissonance is everywhere in business and we're supposed to just swallow it. Honestly I've been a cynical prick for most of my adult life and for a while I played along with it but it just does not align with my values and keeping up the pretense is draining.

                I mean uh. Come work for us / hire us, we're the best at what we do! Honest! AI!

        • herpdyderp 6 days ago |
          I wish they didn't, I have such a hard time figuring out what any of them actually do.
          • dylan604 6 days ago |
            That's the great thing with such an ambiguous statement is that they can pivot at any point without having say they are pivoting. They are in a position to do what ever it is that someone inquires
          • DocTomoe 6 days ago |
            Mission statements have the main function of obscuring that. It is safe to assume that the more obfuscating a mission statement is, the most likely the business goal is to steal investors' monies while finding another fool to buy the whole operation, ideally someone from the FAANG crew.
        • jimbob45 6 days ago |
          Nobody drags YC startups through the mud like we do here.
        • DrillShopper 5 days ago |
          And they are relentlessly mocked for doing so (as they should be)
      • nf3 7 days ago |
        Go to business school?
      • n4r9 6 days ago |
        Wall Street eat your heart out; London has a proud and lengthy history of producing corporate psychopaths.
        • hermitcrab 6 days ago |
          I imagine the people behind this furiously knocking one off while watching the "Greed is good" bit from Wallstreet on loop.
      • acadapter 6 days ago |
        The things people say in the era where comment fields have been removed from news websites (in the name of "avoiding misinformation")...
        • vegetablepotpie 6 days ago |
          I’m not sure the comment fields are considered by media organizations or public figures… like, at all. I remember talking to a journalist about a series they were working on, they said the feedback they’ve gotten has been overwhelmingly positive and no one had anything bad to say about it. The comments on their articles were absolutely negative and vitriolic. I don’t think anyone with a shred of influence or responsibility in western society reads them.
          • asveikau 6 days ago |
            To be fair, a lot of comment sections are garbage, and they can be trolled and brigaded.
          • hyeonwho4 6 days ago |
            For an article like this, the negative comments would be aimed at the people in the article, not the journalist. So the article can be a great (muckraking) article, and the comments might also be vitriolic, and everything is good if the rage is well-aimed.
          • lmm 6 days ago |
            > I remember talking to a journalist about a series they were working on, they said the feedback they’ve gotten has been overwhelmingly positive and no one had anything bad to say about it. The comments on their articles were absolutely negative and vitriolic.

            There are two quite different possible interpretations for that fact pattern.

      • fakedang 6 days ago |
        I mean, other countries would kill to preserve such long-lasting heritage, especially one that's in active use and very much a part of the city.

        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.

        • hermitcrab 6 days ago |
          Indeed. It is shocking how little money it takes to buy influence in the UK. I reckon I could afford my own MP.
          • fakedang 6 days ago |
            You can afford the PM for 50k pounds and the chancellor of the exchequer for 20k if they're Tories.
            • madaxe_again 6 days ago |
              You can get yourself a seat in lords for about £80k of donation, still - the threshold is surprisingly low.
        • lmm 6 days ago |
          > I mean, other countries would kill to preserve such long-lasting heritage, especially one that's in active use and very much a part of the city.

          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.

      • Fnoord 6 days ago |
        Quite simple for the psychopath is nothing, nada, zilch, nil, nix.

        Sociopath, well. The world is cruel, including for children.

      • elphinstone 6 days ago |
        Sounds like an AI trained on decades of lies.
      • DocTomoe 6 days ago |
        Five weeks in any major corporation outside of IT, and you will be spewing that kind of talk like a machine gun. It's mind-numbing. Avoid the suits as if they were spreaders of the plague, because their brain-rot is not much better.
      • rasz 5 days ago |
        Im sure schools like Eton have special courses just for this.
    • lpribis 6 days ago |
      After translation via https://www.bullshitremover.com/:

      > "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".

      • BehindBlueEyes 6 days ago |
        no no > "Unlock the huge potential" = "We have big money with big self serving plans coming in."

        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?

        • surfingdino 6 days ago |
          Yes. Canary Wharf is being transformed from a purely financial district into a mixed business-residential district. They want to move noisy and smelly businesses away from the offices and apartments.
          • bobthepanda 6 days ago |
            Smithfield Market and the City of London are nowhere near Canary Wharf
            • CPLX 6 days ago |
              Billingsgate Market, subject of this article, is on Canary Wharf.
              • snypher 6 days ago |
                It's Smithfield and Billingsgate.
        • seanhunter 5 days ago |
          Billingsgate old fish market is an art gallery now. They moved the actual market to canary wharf ages ago.
    • bradleyjg 6 days ago |
      If I’m reading the article correctly they need parliament’s permission (“private bill”).

      Write your MP.

    • tomcam 6 days ago |
    • Der_Einzige 6 days ago |
      The reality is that almost no one makes any good money in the food industry. For a lot of people in that industry, if they tried to find jobs that better aligned with their skills (except in food), they'd likely be better off. A lot of people take jobs in terrible places and get complacent, maybe far too complacent.

      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!

      • mulmen 6 days ago |
        > 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.

        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.

        • Der_Einzige 6 days ago |
          Our horror to the capitalist economic calculus of this world does absolutly nothing to make the world less ruthlessly capitalistic. In fact, we've seen that all attempts to overthrow capitalism (i.e. communism or SJW liberal wokism) have done nothing but entrench and strengthen capitalism and indeed, strengthen its uniquely worst parts of it.

          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.

        • chris_wot 6 days ago |
          And a lot of them are suffering who definitely could have voted, but decided not to.
          • Fnoord 6 days ago |
            And a lot were straight out manipulated, including by foreign agents (Russia).
            • bruce511 6 days ago |
              Democracy is a system of government. It asks people to vote on important decisions (like brexit) and to choose leaders to make day-to-day decisions on their behalf.

              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.

              • Fnoord 6 days ago |
                Your argument only works when politicians don't lie, when they're sincere, when people are not getting deceived. It is unreasonable to ask of people of low and moderate intelligence who lack time cause overburdened with work to do proper research in a world of fake news (read: propaganda) and micro targeting. Honestly, I find it victim blaming.

                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.

                • bruce511 5 days ago |
                  I'm merely saying how democracy works. If democracy fails because the people who have the voting power are too unintelligent (your words, not mine) then that's a flaw in the political system.

                  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?

          • kergonath 5 days ago |
            That’s not an excuse. By construction, not voting means voting for the option with the most votes. These people should realise that they would not be in this shite had they bothered to show up.
      • travis_brooks 6 days ago |
        Unfortunately nobody has solved the pesky problem that people need to eat at least once a day, so somebody has to work in the food industry. Getting rid of these central markets means smaller markets spread all over the country will do the same work, but likely making the food more expensive and the supply less reliable.
        • stuaxo 5 days ago |
          And the food worse, since it will be less fresh.

          Keeping these is a strategic good for the country.

    • thaumasiotes 6 days ago |
    • chris_wot 6 days ago |
      I came here to specifically comment on this statement. I've never heard some much spin in one statement.
  • darksfall 7 days ago |
    The whole area is full of so many personal memories; having lived, worked, and partied in & around Smithfield Market.

    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.

  • Daub 7 days ago |
    What the betting that they will turn in to a hive of chi-chi coffe shops, gift shops and bespoke offices, like they did to Coventry Garden and borough market. Since the early 80s London has been on a death dive, with real life London being replaced by a plastic equivalent.
    • tim333 6 days ago |
      Probably but Covent Garden and Borough Market are pretty popular.

      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.

  • zephod 7 days ago |
    We spent our first year as a startup hacking on laptops in the attic of Smithfields, along with a dozen other startups. No idea if Innovation Warehouse is still up there[1]. If you arrived at work early enough they'd still be hosing the blood off the tarmac from the early morning market.

    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.

    [1] https://www.facebook.com/innovationwarehouselondon/

  • ngcazz 7 days ago |
    Guess I better get cross out my "buy fresh meat from Smithfield at 6am" item from my bucket list soon...
  • kibwen 7 days ago |
    If you're in Boston, the open-air Haymarket operates downtown on Fridays and Saturdays, and more-or-less has been doing so continuously for 200+ years now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haymarket_(Boston) Even if you're not near downtown, the prices make it worth the trip (bring cash and bags).
  • teractiveodular 7 days ago |
    It's interesting to see how cities are handling the increasing bifurcation of wholesale and retail markets.

    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.

    • Rodeoclash 7 days ago |
      Yes, although it sounds like Preston has / is / will be at risk from developers that own the land and want to build apartments.

      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).

    • jaza 7 days ago |
      Indeed. The central Sydney locality of Haymarket is that in name only. Same for Wheat Road and The Goods Line. Wholesale fresh produce has all been in Homebush / Flemington for years now, barely accessible to anyone without a semi-trailer and the willingness to purchase a truckload. Shipping also long gone from the central spots of Walsh Bay / Barangaroo / Darling Harbour, all now relegated to Container City aka Port Botany.
    • sfjailbird 6 days ago |
      If anyone is looking for a good read, there's a great book called Arcadia, which revolves around this trend of traditional city food markets being supplanted by upscale hipster traps.
      • mintplant 6 days ago |
        Any idea who wrote it? There are many books with this title.
        • sfjailbird 5 days ago |
          Doh, it's by Jim Crace, should have mentioned that.
          • mintplant 4 days ago |
            Thanks!
  • jahewson 7 days ago |
    > Work has already begun on turning this site into a new cultural and commercial hub, which includes the new London Museum.

    Yes, come to the museum to learn about all this culture we used to have, such as an awesome market.

  • moomin 7 days ago |
    Smithfield features quite heavily in “Great Expectations”. Dickens hated the place. He subscribed to a theory that a city needed good circulation, which meant that things that obstructed traffic were considered bad, and Smithfield was hugely stationary and snarked up everything around it.

    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.

  • slimebot80 7 days ago |
    Still time to prevent this. Fingers crossed.
  • zeristor 7 days ago |
    Farringdon station happens to be where the Thameslink line from North to South London, intersects with the East to West Elizabeth line.

    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?

    • mensetmanusman 7 days ago |
      Literally living out becoming an open air museum.
    • lmm 6 days ago |
      > 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.

  • mensetmanusman 7 days ago |
    When money is all that matters, it makes sense (to first order) to push out everything that seems to lose money and is purely cultural.

    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.

    • cjrp 6 days ago |
      It also feels like a result of housing/property values being so high. When a block of flats can sell for £100m (and bring in council tax money), why keep markets or build libraries. It's sad.
    • SilverBirch 6 days ago |
      Honestly, come around to our neck of the woods and explain to a generation of 20 year olds who grew up in semi-detatched houses that they'll never buy a house in their lifetime because we chose not to build anything because we'd rather honor the dead.
  • PaulDavisThe1st 7 days ago |
    The same thing happened to Covent Garden in the 1970s - the original site was closed, a new one was opened that over time became very evidently much better suited to being a large scale wholesale fruit and vegetable market.

    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.

    • walthamstow 7 days ago |
      But they're not opening a new one! They're closing the current one and telling the traders to fuck off somewhere else
      • PaulDavisThe1st 6 days ago |
        Yo E17 my homie!

        Think of it as encouragement to the traders to find their own new location :)

        • fractallyte 6 days ago |
          Not with the traffic congestion hell that is E17...
        • walthamstow 5 days ago |
          I read in the FT this morning that rather than the traders being told to fuck off as I earlier stated, they are being paid a handsome sum to go quietly.

          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.

    • bearbin 6 days ago |
      The New Covent Garden Market itself is currently in the middle of a multi-decade redevelopment, they've slightly reduced the footprint and sold off some land for development, and the remains (still a massive area) is being _very_ slowly converted into a more modern design - sadly not really a market where you can actually go on foot to buy things, but a co-location area for lots of wholesalers to warehouse and deliver from.
      • PaulDavisThe1st 6 days ago |
        The old one was the same - not retail, just wholesale.
  • DidYaWipe 7 days ago |
    Another fascinating, vibrant part of a city's history destroyed and replaced with generic glossy bullshit.
  • Midnight1938 7 days ago |
    Slightly amusing how a lot of stuff like this thats happening to uk is things they have done to others in the past
    • tonyedgecombe 6 days ago |
      A lot of the problems we are dealing with now are definitely self inflicted.
    • gadders 6 days ago |
      Defeated them militarily and conquered their country?
      • optimalsolver 6 days ago |
        As the Commonwealth made it easier for the people of those lands to immigrate into the UK, they'd now consider it worth it.
  • Tade0 7 days ago |
    This is why I'm distrustful towards any initiatives aiming to make a city "more liveable for humans".

    First they entice you with a vision of a place where everything is within walking distance, then they do this.

    • lbreakjai 6 days ago |
      What's more liveable and walking-distance than a market within walking distance from where you live? This has nothing to do with urbanism, this is purely capitalistic efficiency.
      • Tade0 6 days ago |
        Please read my comment again.

        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.

    • SilverBirch 6 days ago |
      This isn't the type of market you pop down to and buy your weekly shop, this is wholesale. It's largely where restaurants will go to to buy their meat for the day/week. Smithfields opens at midnight and closes at 7am. You can walk past at mid-day and it's just a fairly run-down part of london in the middle of other much nicer parts of London. This is nothing to do with walkable cities.
      • Tade0 5 days ago |
        I'm aware of its purpose.

        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.

  • walthamstow 7 days ago |
    If this market was in Stoke or Hull there would be a national outcry. Farage would be all over it like a rash.
  • gadders 6 days ago |
    I've heard there is a cafe in Billingsgate you can go to first thing in the morning and get a scallop and bacon roll for £8. I need to try it soon.
    • petargyurov 6 days ago |
      > a scallop and bacon roll

      > £8

      Bloody hell...

      • gadders 6 days ago |
        Looks like it was only a fiver in 2020: https://thefoodconnoisseur.co.uk/breakfast/billingsgate-cafe...

        It's not Greggs prices, but I'd like to try it at least once. It looks like it closes at 8am though.

        • devchix 5 days ago |
          This thing looks amazing! The vibe of this place makes me think of all the disappearing delis all over the US, eg. Katz's https://ny.eater.com/2019/8/28/20829116/katzs-delicatessen-r...

          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.

  • lambdaone 6 days ago |
    A tragic and short-sighted act of cultural vandalism for short-term profit. In other words, business as usual.
  • tim333 6 days ago |
    The NYT has a much more detailed article on this. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/28/world/europe/london-smith... or https://archive.ph/dz5zY

    Including that William (Braveheart) Wallace was hung, drawn and quartered there in 1305.

    • IG_Semmelweiss 6 days ago |
      Meat Market... indeed!
  • renewiltord 6 days ago |
    Entertaining. Everyone wants more housing but no one wants to give up anything for more housing. I love it! Haha, imagine making one's bed a certain way, lying in it, then complaining they didn't like it and then making it the same way the next night. Pure magic.

    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.

  • kragen 6 days ago |
    Are these Smithfield and Billingsgate wet markets the last wet markets to close in the wake of the covid pandemic?
  • DrBazza 6 days ago |
    The Corporation of London own the land Billingsgate is on. They've been looking to redevelop this for over a decade since the land's value is now magnitudes more than when it was built because of Canary Wharf and the new Canary Wharf Crossrail station.

    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.

    • slibhb 6 days ago |
      > 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.

    • petercooper 6 days ago |
      Smithfield absolutely is. There's a large (and surprisingly atmospheric) underground car park under it and the Farringdon Elizabeth Line station has an entrance right there now too. Smithfield is one of my favourite "drive into London and park without headaches" spots when Stratford's hotels are sold out.
    • Neil44 6 days ago |
      I'm sure they'll name the new luxury apartments nice names, that nod to the former history of the site.
      • mock-possum 6 days ago |
        > Welcome to Fish Market Flats, where history meets modern luxury! Nestled in the heart of the city, this iconic landmark has been reimagined into a vibrant mixed-use community that blends timeless charm with contemporary living. Once a bustling hub of maritime commerce, Fish Market Flats is now a beacon of urban sophistication, offering high-density condos designed to elevate your lifestyle.

        > 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!

        • Aromasin 5 days ago |
          > 1-bedroom studio flats, shared ownership, starting as low as £1.4m. Larger apartments PoA.
    • dmix 6 days ago |
      > Some things need preserving.

      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.

      • Aicy 5 days ago |
        London has loads of small chaotic markets all over the place
    • nixpulvis 6 days ago |
      How much of that value was created by the food markets?
      • DrBazza 5 days ago |
        Billingsgate? Not so much.

        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

        https://maps.app.goo.gl/VnWimrk3mHw63MFP6

    • rgreekguy 6 days ago |
      Britain keeps on having a bad record with preserving stuff, I see.
      • madaxe_again 6 days ago |
        Oh, Britain preserves stuff alright - they jar and pickle the past into a pastiche, while discarding the institutions and functions that they once had.

        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.

    • interludead 5 days ago |
      This feels like another instance of prioritizing short-term financial gain over preserving history and community infrastructure
    • fransje26 4 days ago |
      > Some things need preserving.

      The bank accounts of the wealthy?

  • Joaomcabrita 6 days ago |
    Sad. Why not revamp, renew and reinvent rather than close it down.

    Loads of examples of markets turned to food and culture markets both in London and other places.. Lisbon, Stockholm, etc.. and they are thriving!

  • helsinkiandrew 6 days ago |
    It’s sad for the traders being evicted but the fact is that these markets have been dwindling in importance for decades. Restaurants and shops don’t get up before dawn to go to market to see what’s fresh, they order from wholesalers online or direct from the farms and get food delivered (often with fresh veg from the same supplier)

    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

  • HenryBemis 6 days ago |
    "it's all about the money now"

    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..?

  • samaltmanfried 6 days ago |
    I just searched for modern images of Smithfield market, and what on earth is that ghastly awning they've bolted onto that beautiful historic (presumably Victorian) facade?

    For example: https://dm1igrl0afsra.cloudfront.net/AcuCustom/Sitename/DAM/...

    • lmm 6 days ago |
      Between a beautiful facade and not getting rained on in London, I know which I'd pick.
  • SilverBirch 6 days ago |
    I walk past/through Smithfields regularly. It's... nice? Ok it's not nice, it' uniquely London but it's just a pretty run down area in the middle of much nicer areas. But the plan was never to keep it, the plan was to knock it down and tell the people who had been working there to go work in Dagenham. So in my view this is no difference. That area of London just doesn't make a whole lot of sense for a meat market anymore, and while you can preserve the buildings you can't preserve a set of businesses that look sillier and sillier by the day. At some point you have to ask what you're actually preserving, because "Smithfields Market (rebuilt in Dagenham in 2025)" isn't really that historical.
    • frosting1337 6 days ago |
      Except the article states the move to Dagenham has been "dropped".
      • SilverBirch 6 days ago |
        That's what I'm saying, if you wanted to preserve it, preserve it where it is. If you're preserving it by moving it to east london... you're not really preserving it. There are plenty of distribution centres in east london already. So it's not really a loss to give up on the Dagenham plan.
  • mgaunard 6 days ago |
    What's the problem with Billingsgate? It's already outside the center in dodgy tower hamlets.

    And it's depended on by all the fine food fish restaurants, including all the sushi ones.

    • cm2187 6 days ago |
      Not that dodgy. It’s right against canary wharf. All the areas immediately around canary wharf are being redeveloped into housing/office/retail buildings, the market is currently surrounded with construction sites.
  • ofou 6 days ago |
    From the City of London wiki:

    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]

    • quietbritishjim 6 days ago |
      £2bn actually doesn't sound that enormous for this sort of organisation. Especially since...

      > 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.

  • Animats 6 days ago |
    It took this long?

    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.

    [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Halles

    [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulton_Fish_Market

    • madaxe_again 6 days ago |
      Billingsgate already moved back in the 80’s, to a facility with modern loading bays, road access, etc., so while what you say about Smithfield is true, it isn’t for billingsgate.
    • gregoriol 5 days ago |
      Another example is this fish market in Tokyo: https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/tokyo-tsukiji-fish-ma...
  • jl6 5 days ago |
    So this is essentially the government ending a subsidy for small businesses?
  • interludead 5 days ago |
    It’s worrying how this could ripple through small businesses and fishmongers who rely on these markets. Where’s the sustainable alternative for them?
  • seanhunter 5 days ago |
    This is a bit misleading about Billingsgate fish market. They shut the real Billingsgate fish market next to London bridge a long time ago and moved it to canary wharf. The fact is London has changed a lot in 850 years and it probably doesn’t really make that much sense to have a wholesale meat market right in Farringdon any more, or even at all, when wholesale buyers can just order what they need direct from suppliers and have it shipped directly to them rather than gathering flies at an open market for a few hours somewhere in the middle because TRADITION.
    • verisimi 5 days ago |
      But tradition! 850 years!!

      Next you'll be telling me that you use that new fangled electricity for lights, rather than candles!

  • stuaxo 5 days ago |
    This needs a change in legislation to get through, I'm not sure why nobody has opened a petition to parliament re: this.