Sir Sadiq Khan’s latest move to pedestrianise a sizeable section of Oxford Street exposes the government’s growing reliance on superficial “revitalisation” schemes that ultimately fail the local communities they claim to serve. By banning traffic along approximately 0.7 miles from Oxford Circus to Marble Arch—and possibly extending further—he aims to mask the district’s ongoing decline with a shiny, pedestrian-friendly image. But these measures do little to address the root causes of the area’s desolation: the relentless economic crisis, the collapse of small retail businesses, and the erosion of community character under a misguided focus on tourism and urban spectacle.

Once the beating heart of London’s retail scene, Oxford Street has been battered by online shopping, economic hardship, and the consequences of pandemic lockdowns—factors that no amount of pedestrianisation can undo. Iconic stores have shut their doors, replaced by souvenir shops and counterfeit markets that epitomise the district’s decline. Instead of addressing these core issues—such as supporting local entrepreneurs and tackling crime—the Mayor’s plan seems more interested in cosmetic improvements. The proposed creation of a Mayoral Development Corporation (MDC), which would assume planning powers from Westminster City Council, risks centralising control and sidestepping local voices, further diminishing the democratic rights of residents and small business owners struggling to survive.

While the plan promises to attract international visitors and encourage investment, it overlooks the concerns of many grassroots voices who see this as another top-down project more focused on superficial glitz than genuine revitalisation. Critics argue that such centralised control distances decision-making from the needs of local communities and risks turning Oxford Street into a sterile, over-touristed zone catering primarily to tourists rather than the city’s residents. The former blocking attempts—once thwarted by Westminster—highlight the ongoing resistance among community groups who fear that this project prioritises corporate interests over local well-being.

Khan’s rhetoric portrays this pedestrianisation as a necessary step to “restore” Oxford Street, but it feels more like a distraction from the real crises facing London’s high streets. It’s a poor substitute for comprehensive support that includes safeguarding jobs, encouraging local entrepreneurship, and addressing the economic inequalities that threaten the city’s future. The effort to turn this iconic shopping street into a “world-class” destination is superficial if it ignores the livelihoods of those who have kept these streets alive for generations.

Furthermore, the plan raises serious questions about urban mobility—particularly how the rerouting of traffic and the disruption of public transport links will impact daily commuters, residents, and small retailers. Promises of a vibrant public space are hollow if the realities of increased congestion and accessibility challenges are not properly managed. Details on how these issues will be addressed are conspicuously absent, prompting skepticism that this initiative is more about image than substance.

In essence, this strategy is yet another example of how the current administration relies on showy projects to cover up deeper failures. Instead of fostering genuine community-led regeneration, it risks turning Oxford Street into a controlled showpiece—more pedestrian mall than thriving high street. Such schemes neglect the fundamental economic realities faced by small traders and local residents, leaving the district more hollowed out than ever. If London is serious about sustainable regeneration, it must reject these superficial fixes and instead invest in policies that empower local communities, support small businesses, and confront the structural problems head-on.

Source: Noah Wire Services