In a stunning blow to local leadership, the Court of Appeal has ruled that the Mayor of Tower Hamlets, Lutfur Rahman, acted unlawfully in his attempt to dismantle three low traffic neighbourhood (LTN) schemes. This decision comes after a three-year battle waged by road safety activists, who fought tirelessly to preserve these traffic restrictions in the east London neighborhoods of Bethnal Green, Shoreditch, and Columbia Road. But here's where it gets controversial: Rahman had campaigned on a promise to remove these LTNs, claiming they were barriers for working-class residents who rely on cars. His manifesto vowed to “reopen our roads and abolish the failed Liveable Streets scheme,” which he argued had blocked access for emergency services and vulnerable residents. Is this a case of prioritizing car convenience over public safety?
Campaigners, however, painted a different picture. Supported by local NHS trusts and five school headteachers, they argued that LTNs are lifelines for communities, offering “simple and cheap infrastructure that protects our streets from the worst impacts of cars and encourages walking, cycling, and public transport.” They emphasized the schemes’ role in reducing isolation, improving safety, and supporting vulnerable residents. And this is the part most people miss: the judge ruled that Rahman overstepped his authority because the LTNs were implemented as part of a traffic strategy agreed with Transport for London (TfL), not as a standalone council initiative.
Ted Maxwell of Save Our Safer Streets credited TfL’s intervention as crucial to the victory. “Their barrister, Charlotte Kilroy KC, was quietly devastating in court,” he said. The ruling underscores that local councils cannot unilaterally dismantle schemes tied to broader transport strategies. Maxwell hopes this victory will inspire activists across London, calling it “a shot in the arm for safer streets campaigners.”
London Mayor Sadiq Khan has been vocal about his vision for fewer car journeys, advocating for more low-traffic streets and 20mph speed limits. A TfL spokesperson welcomed the ruling, stating it provides clarity on boroughs’ legal duties to implement and retain TfL-funded schemes. Meanwhile, Tower Hamlets Council expressed disappointment and plans to seek permission to appeal to the Supreme Court, setting the stage for a potential legal showdown with far-reaching implications.
But what do you think? Is Rahman’s stance a legitimate defense of working-class interests, or does it undermine public safety? Should local councils have the final say on traffic schemes, or is TfL’s oversight necessary? Let’s debate in the comments!
