Hackney Fashion Hub: A parallel universe of tourist wealth, launching in 2014

A tsunami-sized wall of cash is heading to Morning Lane, a shabby thoroughfare in Hackney - but who will benefit from it?

Two years after the riots, a tsunami-sized wall of cash is heading towards Morning Lane, a shabby thoroughfare in Hackney.

The local council secured £5m from the Greater London Authority’s regeneration fund for areas affected by the riots and it is being spent on a project costing tens of millions and called the “Hackney Fashion Hub”. Fashion outlets, a café and design studios will be housed in two new seven- and five-storey buildings and 12 railway arches located opposite and adjacent to the old Burberry factory, which has attracted busloads of Japanese tourists since it opened as an outlet store in the 1990s.

The developers are the Manhattan Loft Corporation, “the company who brought loft living to London” and whose recent projects include “67 of the most unique apartments in London, on the top floors of the Grade I-listed St Pancras Renaissance Hotel”. The architect is the trendy David Adjaye and work starts in 2014.

As well as big-brand fashion salesrooms, the development will include design studios “where locals can show their work”. The stress is on the word “local” and the council is keen to persuade us that this project is not just to attract tourists and investment from the Far East.

So we, the locals, should be over the moon about it, shouldn’t we? I spoke to Lia, who lives in Hackney and works at a vegan, volunteer-run café on Clarence Road, a focus of the London riots. She knew nothing about the development. But some local people do know and are into their designer brands – as the discerning young men who looted the Carhartt outlet near London Fields showed in 2011. Perhaps this is why David Adjaye’s shops on Morning Lane have massive, futuristic-looking riot shields on the front. I asked Adjaye Associates about them and got this reply: “No, those are simply shutters; all shops have shutters on them. They are shutters that cleverly also function as rain shields.”

Hackney Council claims that the new hub will be physically integrated with and encourage visitors to go to “other areas of Hackney” (such as the betting shops and pawnbrokers on the Narrow Way) and “new signage” will encourage them to do that. But in reality it is separated from Hackney Central by the bus station on Bohemia Place, while retailers on the Narrow Way in central Hackney, a site of rioting, are excluded from the party.

They are somewhat disgruntled. So the council has painted bright geometric shapes on the road outside their premises. “Next week we’re getting some pot plants,” said Ayub, who owns a local clothes shop. “They’re trying to kill us.”

So everyone has been catered for: the underclass in the ghetto of the Narrow Way and Clarence Road; the Chinese, South Korean and Japanese visitors in their parallel universe of tourist wealth on Morning Lane; and those who can afford the new flats on Chatham Place. If the shopkeepers still feel dissatisfied, they could participate in a scheme the council has set up called Hackney Is Friendly; it’s a “place to find a friendly face on the Narrow Way. Come in and say hello if you’re passing.”

 

It's all no change in Hackney: a simulated view of the new fashion hub. Photograph: Getty Images.

This article first appeared in the 12 August 2013 issue of the New Statesman, What if JFK had lived?

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

What Jeremy Corbyn gets right about the single market

Technically, you can be outside the EU but inside the single market. Philosophically, you're still in the EU. 

I’ve been trying to work out what bothers me about the response to Jeremy Corbyn’s interview on the Andrew Marr programme.

What bothers me about Corbyn’s interview is obvious: the use of the phrase “wholesale importation” to describe people coming from Eastern Europe to the United Kingdom makes them sound like boxes of sugar rather than people. Adding to that, by suggesting that this “importation” had “destroy[ed] conditions”, rather than laying the blame on Britain’s under-enforced and under-regulated labour market, his words were more appropriate to a politician who believes that immigrants are objects to be scapegoated, not people to be served. (Though perhaps that is appropriate for the leader of the Labour Party if recent history is any guide.)

But I’m bothered, too, by the reaction to another part of his interview, in which the Labour leader said that Britain must leave the single market as it leaves the European Union. The response to this, which is technically correct, has been to attack Corbyn as Liechtenstein, Switzerland, Norway and Iceland are members of the single market but not the European Union.

In my view, leaving the single market will make Britain poorer in the short and long term, will immediately render much of Labour’s 2017 manifesto moot and will, in the long run, be a far bigger victory for right-wing politics than any mere election. Corbyn’s view, that the benefits of freeing a British government from the rules of the single market will outweigh the costs, doesn’t seem very likely to me. So why do I feel so uneasy about the claim that you can be a member of the single market and not the European Union?

I think it’s because the difficult truth is that these countries are, de facto, in the European Union in any meaningful sense. By any estimation, the three pillars of Britain’s “Out” vote were, firstly, control over Britain’s borders, aka the end of the free movement of people, secondly, more money for the public realm aka £350m a week for the NHS, and thirdly control over Britain’s own laws. It’s hard to see how, if the United Kingdom continues to be subject to the free movement of people, continues to pay large sums towards the European Union, and continues to have its laws set elsewhere, we have “honoured the referendum result”.

None of which changes my view that leaving the single market would be a catastrophe for the United Kingdom. But retaining Britain’s single market membership starts with making the argument for single market membership, not hiding behind rhetorical tricks about whether or not single market membership was on the ballot last June, when it quite clearly was. 

Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics.