In a move that has angered tenants and authorities at New Covent Garden, the corporation issued its formal response to the Defra-commissioned review of London's wholesale market structure and in it stated: 'The Corporation of London is willing to discuss the transfer of New Covent Garden from the government.
'It is illogical for the government to operate a single market and the committee recommends that it would assist the better management of London's markets if the corporation agreed to take over the ownership and responsibility for running New Covent Garden Market, provided it could be demonstrated that the corporation would not incur any loss from doing so.' Chairman of the markets committee Daniel Caspi said: 'We have consulted extensively on this comprehensive review with the stakeholders, tenants and all those involved in and around Billingsgate, Spitalfields and Smithfield markets. Our response represents the long-term view: However, it will need government-led legislation.
'It would allow New Covent Garden to build on the success and specialisation it enjoys whilst maintaining the critical mass of Smithfield and Billingsgate markets to enable them to flourish. We foresee the outcome will be a success for all London traders, and for the benefit of London as a whole.' The official statement read: 'The food supply chain requirements for London and the south can be satisfied by reducing the number of wholesale markets in London to a composite market at Spitalfields, a separate specialist wholesale and catering supplier market at New Covent Garden and Western International.
'It would be easier to implement the changes if the corporation owned and were responsible for the management of New Covent Garden as well as its existing three markets.' Saphir's review suggested that both NCG and Spitalfields, alongside Western International, should become composite markets, trading in fruit, vegetables and flowers, meat and fish. The corporation's statement discounts Western, as its plans do not involve meat and fish. While accepting that Billingsgate and Smithfield will be restructured, its view on how this should be done differs from Saphir's. The response said: '[The review] does state that the upgrading of New Covent Garden Market is unlikely to be financially viable in the short term or if it were undertaken outside a comprehensive reorganisation of the markets. The committee accepts that view and would add that the current diversity of ownership of the existing markets hinders the likelihood of a comprehensive reorganisation.
'Any attempt to create composite markets at both Nine Elms and Spitalfields could well double the cost and result in one or both of the markets falling below the 'critical mass' essential for continuing success,' it continued. 'The committee has been advised that international and national suppliers to the markets would be reluctant to service more than one market every day... The committee would be reluctant to recommend that New Covent Garden and Spitalfields should both be expanded to one-site composite markets, even if the necessary money were available and New Covent Garden were under the control of the corporation.' The statement based its preference for Spitalfields as the single, composite site on four pillars: o Spitalfields's proximity to 'good communications and services'.
o The profitability of Spitalfields at Leytonstone would allow restructure through the relocation of just two corporation markets.
o Tenants at Billingsgate have stated a preference to move to east London.
o The variety of non-wholesale activities at Nine Elms could be enhanced to provide other specialist services complementary to those at a composite wholesale market at Spitalfields, and improvements could be made to NCG at a cost significantly less than that of building a composite market.
o The markets committee supported the view of Saphir that well-run wholesale markets will continue to have a useful role in the food distribution chain. It also made clear that markets should be self-financing and should include a return on capital employed.
The committee has come out against the repeal of the 6.66 mile rule however, preferring the status quo which protects the business of existing traders.
Spitalfields tenants have issued their own statement welcoming the corporation's decision for one composite site in east London as it meets with the views of the corporation's tenants, particularly those at Billingsgate. 'If Saphir's review...was flawed in any way it was because it did not take into consideration the views of the tenants either individually or collectively,' tenants' association chairman John Olney said.
