Several years before Stuart Rose was made an honorary Lord, he could be found as a manager at Marks & ; Spencer's Marble Arch flagship store.
“I was there 48 years ago,” says Lord Rose, now chairman of Asda. “I was at the front door when the great and kind brand Marks & Spencer and [then chairman] Lord Siff would come and catch us with our jacket buttons not properly buttoned.”
Lord Rose, 74, was so into it that years later, when he became CEO of M&S, he insisted on moving the much-loved Michael House watch to the corner of the display case.
«If you go there today, you'll see it,» he says. «It's not a landmark building, but I like it.»
However, even he admits that it must change. According to current M&S chief Stuart Machin, the building is «riddled with asbestos» and unusable in its current form.
This is also the cause of the controversy over the future of Oxford Street following Housing Minister Michael Gove's decision to ban the M&S from being demolished and rebuild the shop.
“I can't understand, for the life of me. why he wants to intervene in this particular building,” says Lord Rose.
In July, the Minister for Housing opposed both Westminster Council, which had previously approved the plans, and a government-appointed inspector's recommendation to reject the M&S proposals.
In his ruling, Gove argued that demolishing and rebuilding the building «won't support the transition to a low-carbon future» and could potentially harm the area's heritage.
Blocked M&S redevelopment plans have been criticized for stifling neighborhood upgrade efforts
The decision infuriated M&S, and executives lashed out at what they saw as a «humble» and «anti-business» move.
It also left the company struggling to figure out what to do with a building that, by her own admission, is unusable, and has alarmed neighbors and other retailers who fear that the already dilapidated Oxford Street will continue to fall into disrepair.
Speaking to The Telegraph, MP Simon Clarke said that high streets need «every investment they can get».
“Oxford Street is a place that anyone who knows London will say is not in good shape right now. It has lost its role as a retail outlet and is in dire need of investment and new life.”
Clark says he planned to green-light the project when he was Housing Secretary. He held this ministerial post until Gove replaced him last October.
“I think Michael made the wrong decision in this case,” says Clarke. «If I were secretary of state, I know I would approve of this, and that was definitely my intention when I was there last fall.»
Gove's solution «goes beyond this particular case and sends a broader a signal of our commitment to ensure that London develops in a way that capitals become hotbeds of innovation and change,” says Clarke.
«I think this decision may have a deterrent effect on other investors.»
He adds: “I am very sympathetic to Marks & Spencer, stating that they want to invest in the building. It's very unfortunate that this decision affected these plans so much.»
Signs & Spencer chief executive Stuart Machin said the building was «riddled with asbestos» and, in its current state, was unusable.
Al Watson, Head of UK Planning and Environment at law firm Taylor Wessing, says it's something he can already see.
«It had a freezing effect for the better part of a year and a half, because as soon as he was called, everyone stepped back to watch.
“If a client comes to you who wants to spend money, and you guide him through the planning process. You explain that you can get support from the local authorities, you can get support from the inspector, and then the minister says, «No, well, it's hard to sell.»
Meanwhile, owners of Oxford Street are becoming increasingly frustrated with the state of the area.
Julian Dunkerton, chief executive of Superdry, says Oxford Street «needs some serious help if it is to remain one of the world's leading shopping streets.» .
He proposes making the street walkable, reviewing business rates, and adopting a more «collaborative approach to planning and zoning to avoid an increase in temporary stores.»
Waterstones chief executive James Daunt agrees that policy makers need to do more «to help retail on major streets, including Oxford Street.» The nearest store is on Tottenham Court Road.
Lord Rose says that to rebuild Oxford Street everyone will have to 'bend over — that's a terrible phrase', adding that both politicians and retailers 'have to come to terms with it' «. changes must happen.”
“Oxford Street, of course, has stood still for 50 years. What happened was that the rest of central London underwent a massive renovation. Oxford Street, on the other hand, has gone backwards.»
Suggested solutions to Oxford Street's decline have included a more consistent planning to avoid an increase in the number of temporary stores. Credit: Carl Court/Getty Images
In the coming days, M&S must decide whether to challenge Gove's decision in court.
«The reasons are very limited,» admits Robert Gowing, senior lawyer at Hogan Lovells.
Ultimately, M&S will have to convince the courts that the error occurred in the process of making the decision, not the decision itself.
That would mean an assertion that either the Secretary of State did not take into account material information that was relevant to the case, or took into account material that was not. M&S can also claim that this decision was «manifestly unreasonable».
“That's a pretty high bar,” says Gowing. «Marks & Spencer is unable to dispute the fact that he believes his scheme requires consent. All they can now dispute is that the rules of the game were not properly enforced.”
However, some experts say they think M&S may have reason to send the case back, if the Secretary of State decides to go against the advice of a government-appointed inspector.
«I would be very tempted to challenge the Secretary of State's decision because it seems perverse,» says Taylor Wessing's Watson.
«They could take a stand, since the result of the government's decision is so contrary to what was recommended to it and is unreasonable, which may be the basis.»
If M&S decides not to challenge Gove's decision, she still has to decide what to do with the Marble Arch store.
He was forced to consider all options: in the end, he could either go back to the drawing board and develop a new redevelopment plan, or decide to leave the store unchanged.
The latter direction is not the route executives would like to take, describing the site as «asbestos-studded» and poorly structured.
The retailer has until next Thursday to make a decision. about whether to file a lawsuit. Executives are considered to be cautious, knowing full well that they will have to defend their point of view on narrow grounds.
This saga is a headache that the head of M&S Machin and his colleagues would prefer not to deal with. , especially as the UK retailer is finally starting to gain momentum. The company is on track to return to the FTSE 100 index after a four-year absence.
Lord Rose says: “Why Michael Gove wanted to stick his sticky fingers in it is a total loss to me. What signs & Spencer wanted to do it in a perfectly reasonable way. It's a very complex store and it just doesn't fit the bill.»
Свежие комментарии