GOING WEST – - London Chamber of Commerce and Industry

Secondly, as Annie McDonald, manager of Andea Jewellery, points out: “there are ahuge amount of small businesses … here which is different from the City.” Unlike thecentral zone, the WEZ is dominated by small and medium-sized businesses whichare, due to a smaller profit margin, much more vulnerable to drops in footfall and thusprofit than big retail stores in the West End. Consequently Terry Seraphim, storemanager of Suede, believes that ‘only big stores will survive if the WEZ comes intooperation. Small businesses do not have the necessary financial backing’. Previousresearch by the LCCI found that in the existing c-zone 84 per cent of retailersreported a fall in takings during the first 18 months of the scheme. 8 If the WEZ has asimilar impact on SMEs, it is very likely that that many of them will face closure. Thecorporate communications manager of one department store was ‘anxious that thereis little or no credible evidence about the impact. There is a real difference betweenthe two areas. The retail sector is probably more important to the western area thancentral London’.Finally, as compared with the existing c-zone, the WEZ is primarily a residential area,with 230 000 residents compared with 150 000 in the current zone. 9 LCCI researchhas shown that many directors in the WEZ, such as Balram Puri, director ofPomodoro Clothing Company Ltd, believes that, ‘it is very unreasonable to includesuch an area,, because people most affected are those reliant on driving for theireveryday life. Many interviewees who supported the scheme in the existing c-zone,however, believe that it is unfair to punish residents with a congestion charge.According to Fiona Vanda, corporate manager of T.M. Lewin: “The WEZ is apredominantly residential area with mainly small shops where congestion is not amajor problem. I cannot see how the congestion charge will improve the area in oneway or the other way. It will be disastrous.”Those factors clearly challenge the need and justification to extend the congestioncharging zone. In addition, there is less public transport provision in the WEZ ascompared to the central zone. Richard Ross, proprietor of Trotters Children’s Wear,argues that: “it is a residential area, and therefore not very well served, except formajor routes. Public transport is fantastic in the central zone and that is why thescheme is working there.” Many interviewees, like Hazel Smith from the Kings RoadTrade Association, believe that ‘people receive mixed messages from [Mayor]Livingstone. He wants people out of their cars whilst offering no alternative. Publictransport is generally too expensive and massively overcrowded’. Congestioncharging is almost certainly not needed in the WEZ for the aforementioned reasons.This is exacerbated by the prospect that the introduction of the scheme would have agreater impact on businesses based in the WEZ than companies in the existingcentral zone because west London public transport provision does not represent analternative to using the car. Greg Sherwood, marketing manager of Handford WinesLtd, feels businesses in the WEZ will suffer severely from the congestion chargebecause ‘it is no good penalising motorists if it’s not practical for people to take publictransport’.ConsultationOne of the most contentious issues about the proposed western extension are thetwo public consultations. Despite the overwhelming opposition towards the WEZ theMayor approved plans to extend the congestion charging zone. The Greater LondonAssembly itself passed a resolution saying they believe ‘that the Mayor’s process ofconsultation on his proposed Western Extension of the Congestion Charging Zonehas yet again been a flawed process’.12