Transport for London (TfL) is set to assume control of Oxford Street as the designated highway authority from 20 September 2025, marking a clear push by the Greater London Authority to turn this iconic shopping street into a highly restricted pedestrian zone. The move, rooted in the Highways Act 1980, Section 14B, is presented as a step towards ‘improving’ the area through a £150 million scheme that aims to reduce traffic and boost the leisure experience—yet it raises serious questions about accountability and the true beneficiaries of such policies.
The transfer follows behind-the-scenes negotiations that reveal a troubling disregard for local voices, particularly Westminster City Council’s objections. Conservative members have condemned the decision as lacking transparency, criticizing the GLA for rushing ahead without meaningful consultation—especially given the vital role Oxford Street plays for local businesses and residents, many of whom stand to suffer from increased restrictions on vehicular access. The council’s cabinet member, Daniel Astaire, reportedly halted work on the pedestrianisation, claiming that the proposals lacked sufficient detail and refused to endorse the plan—a move that underscores the deep tensions between Westminster’s local authority and the centralising ambitions of Sadiq Khan’s administration.
Despite these disagreements, legislative powers appear skewed in favor of the GLA. Under Section 14B(5) of the Highways Act 1980, Westminster’s refusal to consent is unlikely to hold much weight; the GLA can still appeal directly to the Secretary of State. With the UK government’s outward support for the scheme, Westminster’s opposition might well be rendered symbolic—an inconvenient obstacle rather than a substantive barrier. A report from Westminster itself admits that rejecting the GLA’s request would bear little consequence without government backing, highlighting the edge that overarching London authorities now hold over local councils.
While TfL claims to be committed to working “collaboratively,” the reality suggests a top-down approach aimed at imposing an ambitious, centralised vision that sidelines local concerns. The push for pedestrianisation echoes broader efforts to enforce sustainable transport policies, but one wonders at what cost to community engagement and economic vitality. The ongoing political friction around Oxford Street exposes the broader dilemma of unchecked authority being wielded in the name of ‘progress,’ often at the expense of the very communities these plans are supposed to serve.
This controversy is emblematic of the troubling trend toward centralised decision-making in London, where political elites prioritize their grand visions over local needs. As the April 2025 handover looms, questions remain about how effectively these plans will be executed, and whether the genuine interests of residents and small businesses will be adequately protected amid the push for ‘green’ urban utopias that may ultimately do more harm than good.
Source: Noah Wire Services