Westminster City Council in central London has launched its first ‘Westminster After Dark’ strategy. The document is out to consultation until June 22. Mark Rowe reviews it in terms of personal safety.
The phrase implies there’s one place, and one ‘after dark’ period, when the reality is anything but. In terms of time, the document splits the 12 hours from 6pm to 6am into four, each of three hours. At first, central London of the working day is leaving, or going for a drink or something to eat or to the cinema before going home; meanwhile the night-goers are coming in, or leaving their hotels. The ‘peak period for hospitality and entertainment, where foot traffic increases’ is from 9pm to midnight. Then comes the ‘late night’ from midnight to 3am, when ‘central venues close’ (that is, having stayed open until the small hours) which implies a need for ‘essential services’ such as cleaning of streets; and transport, to take revellers, and pub and club and other service sector workers (Westminster has about 4400 licensed venues for alcohol, entertainment, and late-night refreshments), home alike. A sign of how parts of Westminster stay open very late – until dawn in midsummer – is that more premises (221) are licensed to shut at 3am than 2am (131).
Another reality is of place. Westminster to the visitor may be best known for the West End, and Soho. It’s also upmarket Bayswater, Lancaster Gate, Hyde Park, Knightsbridge, and Belgravia; and in between Marylebone and Pimlico; the borough is home to 211,000 residents. When visitors say they want (as the document states) ‘better lighting’ so that they can see where they are going, and feel safer from on-street robbery, residents may be annoyed by light pollution. What to some (whether visitors or those who moved to live in central London as a 24-hour city) is ‘the buzz’, to others is noise and nuisance. Workers, according to the document, reflecting findings in other places, would like to see ‘improved late-night transport options’, because, we can add, they feel most unsafe on their way home.
Amenities
The document proposes public amenities such as ‘public toilets, particularly in high-traffic areas like Soho and Covent Garden’, which may be appealing to visitors and locals alike; however, the ‘cleaner streets’ that the document acknowledges are wanted by some arises from the litter dropped by those night-goers. Given the varying constituencies, whose wants do not coincide, the council has to do its best to please everyone; as the document tries to. Thus it states that ‘we remain committed to balancing vibrancy with community well-being, ensuring that noise, congestion, and environmental impacts are carefully managed to protect the quality of life for all’, while admitting in passing ‘the diverse needs of residents, workers, and visitors’.
History
Westminster has had a chequered history in terms of what it offers, as the document touches on – the ‘infamous’ sex shops of Soho, besides the top-end theatres and department stores of the West End. That’s a tribute to the popularity of central London – to this day, pick-pockets, and mobile phone thieves, prey on visitors, precisely because the area is so crowded. Westminster like the rest of London keeps re-inventing itself; after the lockdowns during the covid pandemic, the document speaks of a need for ‘a reimagined approach to resilience and sustainability’. Some of the ‘unprecedented challenges’ that the document speaks of are to do with personal security: anti-social behaviour (ASB), violence and the threat of it (particularly rated by women). As with ASB generally, actual incidents are one thing, and people’s perceptions perhaps another: the document says that ‘feelings of safety have declined’.
Policy
In policy terms, whatever the council does, will satisfy some and not others, whether (to quote the document) ‘stricter regulation of late-night venues’ to bring ‘residential peace’, or more CCTV to monitor streets. ‘Safe and secure’ is one of the document’s proposed five ‘pillars’ – others include the environment (sustainability), community (the residents) and the economy (thriving, to give jobs). Hence the document tries to offer all things to all – it proposes to ‘enforce licensing laws more robustly and hold venues to account if they fail to foster a safe and secure atmosphere’, and asking businesses ‘to take greater responsibility’, while keeping business ‘vibrant’. As the council admits, some matters are in the hands of others; it’s for Transport for London (TfL) for example to restore night bus services.
Elsewhere
Nor is Westminster alone in having to balance interest groups. Neighbouring Camden Council as featured in Professional Security magazine last year, went so far as to apply ‘anti-pee paint’ and put up signage asking people not to urinate in public places, or else face fines.
