London Independence

[PTR 444]

With London possessing a strong population and economy while vastly different from the rest of the UK culturally, I’ve often wondered what the implications would be if it was an independent sovereign state in its own right. The article below gives a brief summary of some of the benefits and drawbacks an Independent London would bring:

Independence for London? The case for, the case against - and the choice of national anthem - OnLondon

What if London became in independent city state? The first speaker at the event addressing that question, presented by On London and The London Society, was Nick Bowes, chief executive of Centre for London and previously director of policy for Mayor of London Sadiq Khan. He imagined “a pretty...

www.onlondon.co.uk

What if London became in independent city state? The first speaker at the event addressing that question, presented by On London and The London Society, was Nick Bowes, chief executive of Centre for London and previously director of policy for Mayor of London Sadiq Khan. He imagined “a pretty progressive” new metropolitan country with liberal drug and immigration policies that would quickly join the European Union and perhaps even adopt the Euro as its currency.

It would be a wealthy country too: the £30-£40 billion in taxes raised in London every year that subsided almost the whole of the rest of the country prior to the pandemic – and will probably do so again – would no longer be exported but spent within London itself. “Imagine what you could do with that,” said Nick. “Imagine how you could transform public services. It would be enough to pay for Crossrail 2 in one go, with enough left over for the Bakerloo Line extension too.”

The list went on: the cash to utterly transform public services and affordable housing supply; the freedom to reform Council Tax; to introduce private sector rent controls, if that seemed a good idea; the ability to to more tightly regulate mysterious offshore property ownership.

Some other points to consider:

• Where should the border be? Current Greater London boundary or M25 seem most logical.
• With London now outside the UK, where would be the best location for a new capital of Britain/England?
• Would we see a mass exodus of London workers migrating from the Home Counties to live in the newly independent city state?
• Could regional centres within the UK gain much more importance, considering they wouldn’t have to compete with London for government investment?
• Should/could there be a hard border between the two?
• Could TfL take ownership of all transport services and infrastructure within an independent London?
• What would London’s flag look like?
• Most importantly, could the UK sustain itself without support from the cash cow of London?

With all these points in mind, if there was a London independence referendum tomorrow, would you vote to remain or leave?

 

[Mojo]

Would we see a mass exodus of London workers migrating from the Home Counties to live in the newly independent city state?

Based on the experience from the USA, where cities already have a fairly large degree of independence from the states and federal governments, I’d say it’s more likely to be the other way around with more people leaving cities run by far-left politicians to escape high taxes and high crime.

 

[AM9]

Based on the experience from the USA, where cities already have a fairly large degree of independence from the states and federal governments, I’d say it’s more likely to be the other way around with more people leaving cities run by far-left politicians to escape high taxes and high crime.

I wouldn't call London's and the South East's MPs "far-left" except for the odd Corbyn etc., but he didn't have much sway when he was Labour leader, and it's unlikely that he will have any impact after the next GE.

 

[Thirteen]

An independent London city state is never going to happen but I could see a Labour Government giving the Mayor of London more devolved powers so it's more akin to the Devolved nations.

 

[GS250]

Based on the experience from the USA, where cities already have a fairly large degree of independence from the states and federal governments, I’d say it’s more likely to be the other way around with more people leaving cities run by far-left politicians to escape high taxes and high crime.

The flight from LA to provincial areas in Texas or Arizona is certainly a thing. Its also happening in London to the home counties and beyond too. The irony being that like in parts of the USA, those who vote a certain way and demand we all do the same are effectively fleeing from their own policies. Do as I say etc etc.

Big cites, certainly not just London are becoming the abode of the wealthy and the poor. The middle ground so to speak...are out. They can't afford to live there and certainly can't afford the consequences of living alongside the high crime areas.

 

[Mojo]

I wouldn't call London's and the South East's MPs "far-left" except for the odd Corbyn etc., but he didn't have much sway when he was Labour leader, and it's unlikely that he will have any impact after the next GE.

If there was some sort of increased devolution then the MPs would remain as they are, it would be the local politicians that would have more impact.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I think the problem is that devolution works best when you have well defined geographical areas that have their own identity and whose inhabitants tend to want or need distinct policies. That's the case for - for example Scotland, which has the benefit (in terms of devolution) of a very thinly populated border area with England which means most people tend to stay entirely on one side or the other of the border. Bht it's definitely not the case for London, which serves as a commuter area for a huge area around it. Wherever you draw any London boundary, there will be vast numbers of people working in London and living outside London, as well as people who live on one side of the boundary but routinely use shops and other services on the other side of it: That would create real problems in terms of devolving things like transport infrastructure or taxation or any business regulation etc.

Maybe you could sensibly devolve the whole of SouthEast England into one authority - because SouthEast England does to some extent have its own distinct needs and culture. But I can't see it working for 'London'.

 

[telstarbox]

• Could TfL take ownership of all transport services and infrastructure within an independent London?

Putting the other points to one side, how would they operate the Watford DC and the Woolwich / Bexleyheath / Sidcup lines? For the latter the current Greater London boundary is shown here

 

[Cloud Strife]

. Wherever you draw any London boundary, there will be vast numbers of people working in London and living outside London, as well as people who live on one side of the boundary but routinely use shops and other services on the other side of it:

This is the problem with the Irish boundary too. Under pressure from the Protestant majority in Northern Ireland, they didn't implement a border which took into account how people were actually moving around. For instance, take South Armagh: people from Crossmaglen go to Dundalk, not Newry. It's the same in County Donegal, where the Laggan should really have been left in Northern Ireland, rather than becoming part of the Free State despite having cultural connections to Derry. There is a strong Protestant minority there, and there was a lot of logic in putting South Armagh in the Free State while keeping the Protestants in Donegal in Northern Ireland.

 

[GS250]

This is the problem with the Irish boundary too. Under pressure from the Protestant majority in Northern Ireland, they didn't implement a border which took into account how people were actually moving around. For instance, take South Armagh: people from Crossmaglen go to Dundalk, not Newry. It's the same in County Donegal, where the Laggan should really have been left in Northern Ireland, rather than becoming part of the Free State despite having cultural connections to Derry. There is a strong Protestant minority there, and there was a lot of logic in putting South Armagh in the Free State while keeping the Protestants in Donegal in Northern Ireland.

Parallels with Ukraine?!

 

[Peter0124]

Id put the new capital in somewhere like Manchester if this was to actually happen, as it's the most central major city.

 

[PTR 444]

Id put the new capital in somewhere like Manchester if this was to actually happen, as it's the most central major city.

For the entire UK certainly, but Scottish independence is 99% more likely to happen than a London city state. Birmingham is already the most centrally located major city in England, and not too far from much of Wales either.

 

[WizCastro197]

Id put the new capital in somewhere like Manchester if this was to actually happen, as it's the most central major city.

Birmingham? I think if we were deciding a new capital, we shouldn't go off just size. Historical importance and local economy also matters.

M25 boundary doesn't seem sensible as Surrey would lose Epsom, Merstham etc, I think current Greater London Boundary works fine.

 

[brad465]

Based on the experience from the USA, where cities already have a fairly large degree of independence from the states and federal governments, I’d say it’s more likely to be the other way around with more people leaving cities run by far-left politicians to escape high taxes and high crime.

Or it could be at the other end of the spectrum and be a tax haven with low tax and low regulations, like Luxemburg, Monaco or Singapore.

 

[AM9]

Or it could be at the other end of the spectrum and be a tax haven with low tax and low regulations, like Luxemburg, Monaco or Singapore.

Ah, just what Tufton St ordered.

 

[NorthOxonian]

I think the problem is that devolution works best when you have well defined geographical areas that have their own identity and whose inhabitants tend to want or need distinct policies. That's the case for - for example Scotland, which has the benefit (in terms of devolution) of a very thinly populated border area with England which means most people tend to stay entirely on one side or the other of the border. Bht it's definitely not the case for London, which serves as a commuter area for a huge area around it. Wherever you draw any London boundary, there will be vast numbers of people working in London and living outside London, as well as people who live on one side of the boundary but routinely use shops and other services on the other side of it: That would create real problems in terms of devolving things like transport infrastructure or taxation or any business regulation etc.

Maybe you could sensibly devolve the whole of SouthEast England into one authority - because SouthEast England does to some extent have its own distinct needs and culture. But I can't see it working for 'London'.

The other issue is that this idea of London being completely different from the rest of the country doesn't apply to the entire metropolis. It's probably true of some of the boroughs in Inner London, but once you head out into the outer zones there's little difference between it and any other large city. It's a bit more diverse (though not always, Romford certainly isn't) but it's not really any more liberal or left-wing; if anything there are parts of London with Conservative MPs that would elect Labour MPs if they were on Merseyside or Tyneside.

 

[AM9]

The other issue is that this idea of London being completely different from the rest of the country doesn't apply to the entire metropolis. It's probably true of some of the boroughs in Inner London, but once you head out into the outer zones there's little difference between it and any other large city. It's a bit more diverse (though not always, Romford certainly isn't) but it's not really any more liberal or left-wing; if anything there are parts of London with Conservative MPs that would elect Labour MPs if they were on Merseyside or Tyneside.

The onlhy way that London will cease to be the capital of the UK (residual or otherwise) is if the stock and money markets and much of the tourist business collapses and a new administrative centre is established elsewhere in England. In other words, it just isn't going to happen.
The best that the provinces can hope for is a bit more moving civil service operations to other centres

 

[Mojo]

Or it could be at the other end of the spectrum and be a tax haven with low tax and low regulations, like Luxemburg, Monaco or Singapore.

Unlikely, given the current politicians in charge.

 

[brad465]

Unlikely, given the current politicians in charge.

That assumes the current politicians or politicians with the current ideology remain in place. There was a time that Boris Johnson ran it for 2 terms as Mayor, and also worth noting that the current political constitution/legislative body in London would need radical reform in order to become suitable as an independent sovereign state, or fully federal (although not so much in the latter), a change in system has the potential to change which type of politician/party dominates it.

 

[DC1989]

Certainly if labour get in and the promised devolution revolution comes into fruition then London should get more autonomy. Can't see central government willfully giving up the money though. Doesn't London contribute around a quarter of the countries GDP?

Not much would change migration wise I would argue. People would come to London in their youth and leave to a house with a garden when they are older. Plus la change. Not sure yet are escaping far left politicians such as *checks notes* Boris Johnson

 

[nw1]

I can see the desire within London itself, in the sense that London appears to generally reject the right-wing populist politics which has dominated the scene since 2016.

However full independence for London would risk shifting the politics of the rest of the UK significantly to the right, in the same way as Scottish independence would do - as a lot of non-Tory MPs would be lost.

Also of course, without London, the rest of the UK would likely struggle economically.

I certainly would not support devolved rule for the South of England outside London. It would just be utterly dominated by the Tories, and I doubt the other parties would ever get a look-in. As a left-leaning long-term Southern England resident, I believe any attempt to do this must be resisted.

 

[Wynd]

The City of London is already, to all intents and purpses, a State within a State.

 

[chorleyjeff]

With London possessing a strong population and economy while vastly different from the rest of the UK culturally, I’ve often wondered what the implications would be if it was an independent sovereign state in its own right. The article below gives a brief summary of some of the benefits and drawbacks an Independent London would bring:

Independence for London? The case for, the case against - and the choice of national anthem - OnLondon

What if London became in independent city state? The first speaker at the event addressing that question, presented by On London and The London Society, was Nick Bowes, chief executive of Centre for London and previously director of policy for Mayor of London Sadiq Khan. He imagined “a pretty...

www.onlondon.co.uk

Some other points to consider:

• Where should the border be? Current Greater London boundary or M25 seem most logical.
• With London now outside the UK, where would be the best location for a new capital of Britain/England?
• Would we see a mass exodus of London workers migrating from the Home Counties to live in the newly independent city state?
• Could regional centres within the UK gain much more importance, considering they wouldn’t have to compete with London for government investment?
• Should/could there be a hard border between the two?
• Could TfL take ownership of all transport services and infrastructure within an independent London?
• What would London’s flag look like?
• Most importantly, could the UK sustain itself without support from the cash cow of London?

With all these points in mind, if there was a London independence referendum tomorrow, would you vote to remain or leave?

Here in the NW I hope London and the SE continue to support us. London centric Politics/ Media/Arts is probably a price worth paying.

 

[telstarbox]

Although in other countries the regional cities are more heavyweight for media and culture so it isn't all concentrated in one corner. It does feel like that is changing here especially with the North West having a stronger arts provision.