Does Uber ban spell the end to open London?

In 2016 Mayor of London Sadiq Khan expressed that London was "open for business.” This came as a welcome reinforcement of London's place as the global financial center of the world following Brexit. However, the decision to remove Uber's licence shows a worryingly different picture. To the world it would now appear that the United Kingdom is closing its door to enterprise, innovation, and opportunity.

This is an unwelcome victory for the lobbyists acting on behalf of the notorious black cabs that for many decades held a monopoly over London taxis with a side serving of extreme pollution, overpriced journeys and outdated practices.

At the most fundamental level this blanket ban on Uber's operations in London by the refusal to renew their licence is at odds with the British approach to free markets and entrepreneurialism. This belief in capitalism is the very spirit that made Britain the pioneers of the industrial revolution, and recently put London at the heart of the digital revolution.

The impact of the ban is the equivalent of making a whole town the size of Braintree in Essex unemployed, as Uber currently has 40,000 drivers in London. If London was to be an example for other local authorities with devolved transport power, this could have widespread negative consequences across the country. This would impact on many more thousands of drivers across the country, causing further uncertainty not only for those working as Uber drivers, but for consumers and the UK's competitiveness in terms of attracting new business and encouraging entrepreneurship.

The ban is also an insult to consumers. Uber now has 3.5 million customers in London and there has been over 20 million rides taken in London alone since 2012. Uber has become one of the world's largest service sector companies, which makes this ban all much more symbolic of a wider problem amongst the decision makers at City Hall and TfL. This decision is at odds with freedom for the consumer and every Londoner to choose their mode of travel.

The implicit message from this ban is that the UK can be an unwelcome shore for foreign enterprise delivering efficient and effective services in the capital and across the country. It is clear that the Uber ban is not just damaging for London, but will cause immense reputational damage to all of the UK as a hub for global business.

In the implementation of this ban, TfL and the Mayor of London have caved to the established business interests which seek to restrict consumer choice and restore the historic monopoly over London's transport system. This is a decision that has been made in favour of a small number and against the people of London.

It is an attack on the freedom of all Londoners to have choice on their mode of transport. Market choices are available due to London's current ability to attract the best entrepreneurs and private sector companies. To restrict consumer choice sends a very bad signal to the rest of the world - that London is closing the door to freedom and market choice.

The move to ban Uber, in frank terms, is nothing short of catastrophic. In a time when Britain should be showing it is open for business and attracting further investment, this move will lower confidence in Britain as an attraction for private sector investment - reducing the country's competitiveness in global markets.

Most importantly, in every way, from consumer choice to those employed due to Britain's thriving economy, it is a betrayal by regulators in which people place their trust.

Sadiq Khan's ineptitude and ignorance has tied the noose around the free market to provide the best and most cost-effective services to Londoners; and the execution has 21 days to be appealed.