Exchange of views

Covent Garden's Market Authority and tenants association issued this joint statement.

'The three-month period within which comments were invited by Defra on the Saphir report on the future of London's wholesale markets has now ended....Some 30 comments have been made from interested parties. There is now a further period of three months within which Nicholas Saphir recommended the major interested parties should try and agree upon a plan for implementation.

'On February 11 we issued a joint statement – following a well attended meeting of the tenants' association – welcoming the central recommendation of the report that there should be three main composite London markets for fruit, vegetables and flowers as well as meat and fish. This remains our view.

'We now understand that the Corporation of London has recommended that – Western International Market apart – there should be only one composite market and that should be based on the Spitalfields site. Furthermore, the corporation strongly maintains that the claimed 6.66 mile market franchise area should be maintained and that New Covent Garden Market should still not be able to allow meat and fish tenants to sell face-to-face to their customers. Both of these recommendations...are at direct variance with the key recommendations in the Saphir report and we cannot accept them.

'We are, of course, willing to discuss and negotiate on proposals for the future of London's wholesale markets and particularly the future of the tenants and the workforce here at the Nine Elms site. Any such discussion or negotiations must...be within the context of the central Saphir recommendations.' The Corporation of London has written to Leif Mills, chairman of the CGMA to clarify 'misunderstanding' over recent discussions between the two authorities.

In the letter, it stated: '...The corporation has a good track record of taking the long view and making a success of its activities and we would not wish to adopt New Covent Garden only to see it fail.' The corporation reiterated its support of the view of Nicholas Saphir that the present system of wholesale markets in London ought to change and that change is likely to result in fewer wholesale markets in London.

'The corporation supports the view 'that London's requirements for meat, fish, fruit and vegetables could be accommodated efficiently and economically on two composite sites, east and west of the capital,' said the letter. 'The corporation also supports the view that 'a central London site, largely focused on hospitality trade would reduce the pressure on the expansion needed at the two outer markets'.

'...The corporation considers...the creation of composite markets at [both] Spitalfields and Nine Elms would not be viable, even if the necessary money could be raised.' 'The corporation believes that the expansion of New Covent Garden could be focused on the hospitality trade...This does not in any way, imply a diminution of the...wholesale activities at New Covent Garden.' The tenants' association at Western International also given its reaction to events.

'Whatever may happen in the future, Western International will remain a successful wholesale horticultural market,' said chairman George Bray. 'Every possible scenario at varying degrees is good for Western International Market...Our situation is not dissimilar to that of Spitalfields...it is also my opinion that the issues of critical mass and delivery problems are red herrings:...the only land available at Spitalfields is green-belt land, which is the same as ourselves.

'We have proceeded with our redevelopment in a responsible manner: A brand new, modern, slightly smaller market will be built for efficient, financially viable companies...Our scheme does not involve the use of any green-belt land surrounding the market. If however government, local authorities and other interested parties deem it imperative to use a small proportion of that green-belt land...then we would be happy, and so would the London Borough of Hounslow, to accommodate their wishes, should funding be available.

'We at Western fully support the review by Nicholas Saphir, but feel that the publication for the Markets Committee by the Corporation of London is flawed... it is not in the best interest of central London, Greater London and the areas to be supplied.

'The corporation has...taken the line that best suits its own interest.

'Much has been made of the fact that Billingsgate tenants have expressed a wish to be relocated to Spitalfields, but...this is only in the event that the corporation is unwilling to upgrade their current market...and although they have expressed a wish not to be relocated to Covent Garden, it would appear from the corporation's stance that Western would not be a consideration.

'We consider it ludicrous to travel the vast distances to Spitalfields Market from the customer base that this market supplies...with all the issues that this entails, when an alternative can be found, even if it does not suit the Corporation of London.'