Birkenhead Market: Decline, Regeneration Failures, and Council Accountability
- Rory
- Jun 16
- 26 min read
✍️ Author’s Note
This article was developed as part of a wider effort to understand and document the key turning points in Wirral’s regeneration agenda. It builds directly on the research in Stalled by Structure – How Wirral’s Regeneration Engine Keeps Stuttering, which identified Birkenhead Market as one of the most mishandled and least transparent redevelopment cases of the past five years.
As with that previous article, this investigation used AI tools to help process, structure, and cross-reference open-source materials—ranging from council meeting minutes and news reports to trader statements and press coverage. These tools are invaluable for working through large volumes of fragmented information. But they’re not perfect. Mistakes or omissions can occur, and none are by design. If you spot anything inaccurate or missing, please let me know—it will be corrected transparently.
The goal of this work is not to target individuals or score political points. It’s to encourage better scrutiny of decisions made in our name—and to ask, plainly: are we getting the regeneration we were promised? Are the outcomes worth the money, time, and trust invested?
Transparency is not just a legal checkbox. It’s how trust is earned—and how progress becomes real.
—Rory Wilmer, New Brighton, June 2025
Introduction
Birkenhead Market, an iconic 200-year-old public market on the Wirral, was long the bustling heart of the local economy. Founded in the early 19th century, it became a cornerstone of community life and commerce, drawing shoppers from across Merseyside and North Wales in its heyday.
Today, however, this historic market symbolises the broader decline of UK high streets – its stalls half-empty, infrastructure in disrepair, and traders seething with frustration. Decades of mismanagement, strategic blunders, and a lack of visionary leadership by Wirral Council (and its regeneration committee) have eroded trust and driven the market into crisis. This article digs deep into Birkenhead Market’s story – from grand Victorian origins to recent tumult – to understand how leadership failures and broken promises brought a local institution to the brink.
We’ll explore the market’s evolution through the ages, chronicle key events of the past few years, and shine a spotlight on the decisions (and indecisions) that left veteran stallholders feeling betrayed. The goal: to inform the public with a comprehensive, evidence-backed narrative that holds authorities to account and points toward lessons for reviving not just Birkenhead Market, but Britain’s beleaguered town centre markets in general.
Historic Timeline (Origins–2000s)
Origins and Boom: Birkenhead Market’s roots trace back to 1835, when the town’s first covered market opened on a site donated by a local benefactor. As Birkenhead’s population exploded in the mid-19th century, the market expanded dramatically. In 1845 a grand new “Old Market” hall was unveiled – at the time Europe’s second-largest market (only Liverpool’s St. John’s was bigger). Built with extensive iron and glass, this Victorian market hall was an architectural marvel akin to London’s Crystal Palace, and it quickly became the vibrant hub of commerce in Birkenhead. Historical accounts note that Birkenhead’s market “attracted people from across Merseyside, North Wales and beyond,” underpinning the town centre economy and wider retail offer.
By the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the market was not just a shopping venue but a cultural fixture – a place where generations of Wirral residents mingled, traded, and built livelihoods.
Fire and Rebirth: The 20th century brought both challenges and resilience. In 1969, disaster struck when the venerable market hall was heavily damaged by fire. Remarkably, the market rebounded, only to face an even greater calamity a few years later. On the night of 9 November 1974, a catastrophic blaze engulfed the 129-year-old market hall, reducing it to a ruinous shell.
The inferno – one of Merseyside’s biggest fires – destroyed scores of stalls at the worst possible time (the run-up to Christmas), leaving traders devastatedwirralhistory.uk. “I feel as though I were in the middle of a nightmare,” one stallholder was quoted as saying amid the wreckage. In the blaze’s aftermath, more than 100 shocked stallholders crammed into an emergency meeting with Wirral councillors, pleading for support.
Notably, it emerged that traders were already supposed to have moved to a new site years earlier – the council had planned to rehouse them by 1971 in the modern Grange Shopping Precinct, but construction delays meant the old hall was still in use when it went up in flames This bitter twist – a promised new market delayed, ending in tragedy – would foreshadow future frustrations to come.
Despite the devastation, Birkenhead’s market tradition persisted. The charred Victorian market was gone, but its historic clock (dating back to 1845) was salvaged, restored, and later installed as a centrepiece of the shopping precinct – a symbol that the market’s spirit would tick onwirralhistory.uk. Wirral Council scrambled to provide temporary sites for displaced traders in the mid-1970s, and plans for a replacement market hall were fast-tracked.
By 1977, a new indoor Birkenhead Market opened adjoining the Grange Precinct (what later became the Pyramids Shopping Centre). This modern facility gave the market a fresh start.
Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, Birkenhead Market remained a linchpin of the town’s retail core, adapting to the mall-style environment. The opening of the Pyramids Shopping Centre in the early 1990s literally grew around the market, integrating it into a larger commercial complex while retaining the market’s distinct character as a home for independent stallholders, fresh produce, and local specialty goods.
Long, Slow Decline: By the turn of the millennium, however, Birkenhead Market – like many traditional British markets – was grappling with changing consumer habits and economic headwinds. The rise of supermarkets, out-of-town retail parks, and online shopping chipped away at footfall. In its prime the market boasted hundreds of stalls and throngs of shoppers but over time the aisles grew quieter.
A major structural change came in 2003, when Wirral Council granted a 125-year lease of the market to a private operator (Birkenhead Market Limited) as part of a broader regeneration scheme. Hopes were high that private investment and expertise would revitalise the market. Instead, the following 15 years saw stagnation and drift. Few significant improvements materialised under external management, and some development plans floated by private partners (including a much-touted scheme with Neptune Developments, later Ion Property, to rebuild the market area) fizzled out without fruition.
By the late 2010s, large sections of Birkenhead Market stood half-empty and dated. What had once been a “popular and successful town-centre destination” with high footfall was now a fading relic of its former glory. Yet, it remained beloved by locals and traders who had weathered all storms – waiting for the council to finally deliver on the promise of a renaissance.
Modern Transition (2010–2020)
Entering the 2010s, Birkenhead Market was at a crossroads. Footfall continued to ebb and many stall units went vacant, but there were also flickers of revival – new traders trying their luck, and a loyal customer base that still cherished the market’s authentic, community feel. The conversation shifted increasingly to “regeneration”, as local leaders realized that without intervention, the market and the wider town centre would keep declining.
Wirral Council began to explore big-picture solutions. Earlier development agreements had faltered (e.g. a plan with Neptune Developments to overhaul the market area collapsed amid complex issues), so the council sought new avenues. In 2018, Wirral Council entered into a joint venture with Muse Developments, creating the Wirral Growth Company to spearhead an ambitious £1bn Birkenhead regeneration masterplan.
Revamping the market was a key component of this vision. That same period, the council moved decisively to bring Birkenhead Market back under public control: in December 2017 the Council’s Cabinet approved acquiring the long leasehold interest from Birkenhead Market Limited. By January 2018, negotiations were underway, and in 2019 – after 15 years of external management – Wirral Council officially took over running the market Council leaders pitched this as a fresh start, with one report calling the market’s takeover a “catalyst” for wider town-centre regeneration.
Initial enthusiasm ran high. Traders, while cautious, were hopeful that direct council stewardship might mean much-needed investment. In March 2018, however, local news already reported some skepticism – Liverpool Echo interviews captured traders saying they felt “ignored” in the council’s early plans for a new market at that time. It became clear that including traders’ voices would be essential to any successful transition, a lesson the council would repeatedly struggle with in subsequent years.
The latter half of the 2010s saw the council draw up plans for a new, modern market facility to secure Birkenhead Market’s future. By 2019–2020, Wirral Council was formulating proposals for a state-of-the-art market as part of its town centre masterplan There was talk of moving the market to a better location, creating a food-hall style venue with a mix of traditional stalls and contemporary attractions – essentially, reinventing Birkenhead Market for the 21st century.
Early concepts focused on a site at St. Werburgh’s Square, an area adjacent to the existing market and the historic St. Werburgh’s Church, which could be opened up as a public square anchoring a new market hall. Artists’ impressions teased a light-filled, welcoming space that would “recapture the historic spirit”of the market in a modern form. The promise to traders was that this purpose-built market would address the shortcomings of the aging facility – offering better infrastructure, more foot traffic, and a secure home for all existing stallholders and more.
In March 2020, just as the world was hit by the COVID-19 pandemic, Wirral’s Cabinet approved a redevelopment strategy for Birkenhead Market. While the pandemic inevitably slowed momentum (the market, like other retailers, faced lockdowns and reduced trade), the council continued developing its plans behind the scenes. By late 2020, the concept of a new market on the site of the former House of Fraser department store (on Grange Road, near St. Werburgh’s Square) was gaining. This represented a pivot – rather than constructing an entirely new building from scratch immediately, the idea was to utilise the large empty department store space as a ready-made shell for the market. The House of Fraser had closed in 2018, leaving a gaping void in the town centre; repurposing it for the market seemed a clever solution to fill that void and modernize the market’s footprint.
Throughout 2019 and 2020, Wirral Council assured the public that Birkenhead Market’s renaissance was imminent. “It’s time for a fresh start,” one council report declared, noting that the market once “attracted people from across the region” and could do so again with the right vision. Indeed, the market’s rich history was often invoked in council rhetoric, emphasizing that it had been “at the heart of the town centre for generations” and must remain so. By the end of 2020, traders were shown initial plans and told to expect a state-of-the-art facility that would “secure [the market’s] future” for decades to come.
However, even at this stage, some cracks in the picture were evident. Communication issues persisted – traders complained of sparse details and slow updates about the new market plans. A pattern was emerging: the council would make a big announcement, then months of silence would follow, leaving traders in limbo. Still, as 2020 turned to 2021, most gave the benefit of the doubt – after all, moving an entire market is a complex task, and the pandemic made any construction or planning timeline uncertain. Little did they know that the real turmoil was yet to begin once the plans moved from paper to execution in the next phase.
Recent Developments (2020–Present)
The period from 2020 to the present (2025) has been marked by dramatic twists, delays, and growing tensionbetween Birkenhead Market traders and Wirral Council. What was supposed to be a hopeful journey toward a shiny new market became, in the eyes of many, a saga of u-turns and broken promises. Below is an overview of key events and decisions in the past few years, along with how traders and the public responded:
March 2020: Wirral Council approves a redevelopment scheme for Birkenhead Market – initially envisioning a purpose-built market hall as part of the Birkenhead regeneration masterplan. Traders are told the council will deliver a “modern and fit-for-purpose” market to replace the aging 1977 structure.
2021: Consultants and architects are engaged to refine designs. Early proposals position the new market at St. Werburgh’s Square/House of Fraser site, with artist impressions circulating. Public statements from council leaders express excitement about securing the market’s future, but specific timelines remain vague, and traders begin to itch for concrete details.
November 2021: Rent Controversy – Behind the scenes, Wirral Council implements a rent increase on vacant market stalls (an attempt to align or raise revenue). This move isn’t widely advertised, and later it becomes a flashpoint when traders discover it. At the time, traders are unaware but already concerned about dwindling stall numbers and the council’s management of the existing market.
Mid-2022: Visible progress on the new market is minimal. Footfall continues to drop at the existing market, exacerbated by COVID after-effects and competition. Some long-time traders close up shop, unable to hang on for a revival that feels perpetually “just two years away.” Wirral Council faces criticism in local media for the slow pace, but officials insist the project is ongoing, just complex.
April 2023: A major flashpoint – The Birkenhead Market Tenants’ Association (BMTA) files a formal complaint to the council, alleging a “hidden scheme to reduce the number of market stallholders” and put the market into “managed decline”. Trader representative Alan Featherstone (speaking for BMTA) accuses the council of neglecting the market and perhaps intentionally letting it die out to make redevelopment easier. This bombshell claim pushes the council to launch an internal investigation (handled by its internal audit team) in October 2023.
December 2023: U-turn on New Build – Wirral Council quietly shelves the plan to build a new market hall on the former House of Fraser site, citing rising costs and feasibility issues. Instead, the council leadership proposes a cheaper, faster alternative: relocating the market into the former Argos store on Princes Pavement (within the Pyramids Shopping Centre). This announcement, coming late in the year, blindsides many traders. The Argos unit is considerably smaller than the current market footprint and tucked away at one end of the precinct – traders immediately worry it’s an “out of the way” location. Crucially, the council’s change of plan occurs with scant consultation – traders had not been directly involved in choosing the Argos option, fuelling resentment.
27 March 2024: The Council’s Economy, Regeneration & Housing Committee (chaired by Cllr Tony Jones) convenes to decide on the Argos relocation plan. Despite trader opposition, the committee votes to press ahead with the proposal to move Birkenhead Market into the former Argos unit on Princes Pavement. Council leaders highlight positives of the site: high footfall area, proximity to bus station, and potential synergies with future nearby housing developments. However, traders publicly voice alarm, telling the Local Democracy Reporting Service that they fear they are “witnessing the demise of Birkenhead as a market town” if this move goes. They also leak that they had offered alternative options – such as refurbishing the existing market or moving to a different empty site (St John’s Pavement) – but the council ruled those out as non-viable.
March–April 2024: As news of the Argos plan spreads, public reaction is mixed. Some residents support the idea of a new market space if it means finally getting regeneration going; others side with traders, questioning if the smaller site will gut the market’s traditional character. The local press runs headlines like “Traders fear move will see ‘demise of market town’”, amplifying traders’ concerns that the market’s legacy is at risk.
Mid-2024: The council works on design details for the Argos site conversion. It hires a specialist market consultant (Raymond Linch of Market Place (NW) Ltd) and architects (Corstorphine & Wright) to design the interior of the new market. A controversial finding emerges from the consultant: by his analysis, Birkenhead only needs around 5,000 sq ft of stall space in the new market – even though the current market has 17,000+ sq ft occupied by traders In other words, the consultant believes many stalls are underused and the market should “shrink to thrive.” When this gets back to traders, it’s met with fury: the implication is that not all existing traders will make the cut for the new market.
September 2024: Wirral Council launches a public consultation on the new market designs, revealing glossy CGI images of how the “Market in the Argos” could look The designs show a cleaner, more compact market layout with a mix of food kiosks, retail stalls, and even spaces for a bar and entertainment (e.g. karaoke nights) – features intended to attract a new evening economy. The council’s messaging is upbeat: “Birkenhead Market… is ready to embrace positive steps to secure its future,”proclaimed Council Leader Paul Stuart, inviting the public to give feedback on the. Traders, though, remain deeply skeptical and many boycott the consultation sessions, feeling their input has been ignored for months.
15 October 2024: Councillors formally approve the new market scheme (Argos site) in a committee meeting, effectively locking in the relocation as council policy. The target completion date is set for 2026, and a budget of roughly £12 million is noted for the project.
January 2025: The findings of the council’s internal audit investigation (sparked by the 2023 BMTA complaint) are published, and it’s a scathing report on council conduct. The audit confirms that Wirral Council had misled the public with incomplete information about Birkenhead Market plans. Notably, auditors find that council officers failed to disclose the 2021 vacant stall rent hike, even denying such increases when asked – “misleading” the public and traders. The report points to “missed opportunities to be transparent” and inconsistency in rent policies, concluding that these actions damaged trust. In response, the council’s Regeneration Director Marcus Shaw (who joined in 2023) issues a public apology for “incorrect information” given about market rents. The council promises to implement the audit’s recommendations – including publicly posting rent rates and improving record-keeping – to ensure “greater transparency in the future”.
2 June 2025: With little progress on the ground (the Argos site still being stripped out for construction), trader frustration boils over in the media. In a headline-grabbing ITV News segment titled “‘They think we are thick’: Birkenhead market traders left in limbo over relocation plans,” stallholders unleash their anger. Joe Orr, chair of the BMTA, says communication from the council dried up after the March 2024 decision, with multiple meetings canceled and emails ignored. “At present, there appears to be a complete lack of direction and accountability,” Orr says, describing the council’s handling as “hidden agendas and poor communication” that make it impossible for traders to plan their future. Tommy Roberts, a butcher and longtime trader, expresses raw outrage: “They think we are thick and we do not know… You haven’t got a clue or you do not want to tell us,” he says of the council’s leadership, accusing them of cowardice in not being honest with traders. Both men decry the council’s focus on add-ons like cocktail bars and nightlife in the new market, rather than addressing traders’ core needs. The ITV report notes that traders feel “ignored” and anxious as the council pushes forward with a plan they believe is flawed. The relationship between traders and the council has never been more poisoned. A council spokesperson, pressed by media, insists that construction on the new market will start in summer 2025 and that communication will “take place with more regularity as the project progresses” – a promise met with eye-rolls by traders who say they’ve heard it all before.
June 2025 (Present): Birkenhead Market remains in a state of limbo. The existing market hall, visibly dilapidated, is only about one-third occupied – 43 stalls out of roughly 150+ spaces are still trading as of early 2024, and that number may have dwindled further. Longtime customers lament the market’s sad state, with some days seeing more pigeons than people in certain aisles. Traders are split between those clinging on in hopes of a turnaround and those preparing exit plans. Meanwhile, the council is moving into the construction phase for the new market, even as the cloud of distrust hangs overhead. The saga has become a local political issue, with opposition councillors and community advocates criticizing the ruling administration for “losing the trust of market traders and shoppers.” In short, Birkenhead Market’s future remains uncertain, and the next year will be critical in determining whether this grand old market survives or fades away.
Case Analysis: Council Leadership & Trader Backlash
The unfolding crisis around Birkenhead Market has laid bare failures in leadership, vision, and execution at multiple levels of local governance. Here we map out the key figures and decision points – essentially, who did (or didn’t do) what – and how things might have gone differently with better foresight.
Wirral Council & Regeneration Committee: The governing body at the center of decisions is Wirral Council’s Economy, Regeneration & Housing Committee (and previously the Cabinet, under the old system). This committee, chaired in recent years by Cllr. Tony Jones, has been responsible for steering the market redevelopment.
Under Cllr. Jones’ oversight, the committee approved the masterplans and the crucial decisions to change course on the market’s location. While Jones and colleagues consistently talked up a “thriving and attractive town” vision for Birkenhead, traders say the committee’s actions often betrayed a lack of genuine understanding of the market’s on-the-ground reality. One glaring example was the lack of consultation before pushing the Argos plan. In fact, during a public questions session, a representative (Greg McTigue of the BMTA) directly asked whether the chair was worried that “a lack of consultation with traders and a rushed report” were undermining the market’s future – a pointed question that captures the traders’ feeling of being railroaded by the committee’s top-down approach.
The committee’s failure to bring traders into the planning process at an early stage is widely seen as a critical misstep that seeded later discontent.
Political Leadership (or lack thereof): Birkenhead Market’s decline has spanned multiple council administrations, suggesting a systemic leadership failure rather than one individual’s lapse. Former Council Leader Phil Davies(Labour) was at the helm when the market lease was bought out in 2018 – a bold move that in hindsight lacked a follow-through plan. Davies championed the idea of strategic acquisitions (the market, the nearby Europa Buildings, etc.) to enable regeneration, but the subsequent detailed planning was slow. After he left office in 2019, leadership passed to Cllr. Pat Hackett, then Cllr. Janette Williamson, and currently Cllr. Paul Stuart– a rapid turnover at the top. This churn likely disrupted continuity: each new leader had to get up to speed on the market project, and may have had different ideas or priorities. For instance, Pat Hackett was an early enthusiast of the St. Werburgh’s Square concept; Janette Williamson oversaw the pandemic period when little could be advanced; Paul Stuart ultimately approved pivoting to the Argos scheme in late 2023.
The upshot is that no single leader consistently owned the Birkenhead Market project from start to finish, which traders believe led to wavering vision and accountability voids.
It’s also worth noting that these leaders and the ruling council party (Labour for most of this period) faced competing pressures – massive regeneration funding bids, other parts of Birkenhead needing attention, and budget constraints. In that juggling act, the market perhaps did not get the focused, passionate champion it needed at the highest level. A local Green Party councillor who visited the market remarked that traders felt “completely let down by [both] Labour and Tories” over the years, as neither delivered a sustainable plan when in power (according to anecdotally reported comments). This bipartisan failure indicates that the issue transcends party – it’s about institutional inertia and short-term thinking.
Regeneration Officers and Strategy: Another key player is the council’s professional regeneration team. During much of the 2020–22 period, the Director of Regeneration and Place was Alan Evans (until 2023, when Marcus Shaw took over). These officials are responsible for translating political decisions into viable projects.
The internal audit in 2023–24 shed an unflattering light on this level of management: it found that council officers provided misleading information to the public about market plans and rents. Specifically, someone in the regeneration or assets department decided to withhold the fact of rent increases on vacant stalls, presumably to avoid backlash or demands for rent relief This decision, once uncovered, was a major embarrassment – it violated the trust of traders and gave credence to the “hidden agenda” narrative.
Marcus Shaw’s apology in 2025, essentially saying “we’re sorry we weren’t transparent”, underscores a failure in governance and culture within the regeneration team. A more forthright approach – being honest about challenges, inviting trader input on tough choices – might have prevented some of the distrust from snowballing.
Strategically, one could argue the regeneration team became fixated on a certain vision (e.g. relocating to a new site with a modern vibe) and were unwilling to course-correct even as warning signs appeared. For instance, when traders and even independent experts raised concerns that the Argos site was too small or tucked-away, the council insisted high footfall and transport links would make it work. This optimism may have blinded them to legitimate issues like how to accommodate larger anchor traders (butchers, fishmongers) in a downsized market. The lack of a Plan B – if the new site doesn’t pan out, or if many traders quit – was another failure of foresight.
Market Traders & Community Stakeholders: On the other side of this saga are the traders themselves – people like Joe Orr, Greg McTigue, Tommy Roberts, and others who have become vocal representatives. Their backlash, while often directed at “the council” in general, highlights personal grievances with leadership. Orr and McTigue, as BMTA leaders, have attended countless meetings and sent detailed letters, only to feel stonewalled. The emotional toll is evident in their public quotes: “We deserve to be treated with dignity, not as an afterthought in a logistical process,”Orr implored, noting that many have traded for “years, even decades” and simply want honesty about what’s next. When such pleas go unanswered, frustration turns to fury and cynicism. The traders’ mistrust now runs so deep that some genuinely suspect the council’s motive is to kill off the traditional market and replace it with a sanitized food court. Whether or not that is true, the council’s communication failures created a vacuum where conspiracy theories flourished.
The community at large, including local shoppers and residents, also plays a role. Birkenhead is a town that has seen numerous regeneration promises come and go. Patience is wearing thin. Public trust in the council’s regeneration schemes is low, not just because of the market, but also other stalled projects. For example, previous plans for offices, housing, and leisure developments in the area have been slow to materialize, breeding skepticism.
The market, being so visible and historic, has become a touchstone for that skepticism. When traders staged small demonstrations or spoke to the press, many locals voiced support, essentially saying “the council needs to get its act together.”
There’s a growing sentiment that leadership needs to be held accountable – whether through elections, or through ongoing scrutiny by local media and watchdogs – to ensure this project doesn’t become another footnote in a history of unmet plans.
Moments Where Better Strategy Could Have Helped: Looking back, several inflection points stand out where different choices might have altered Birkenhead Market’s trajectory:
Rebuild vs. Refurbish: Early on, the council committed firmly to building a brand-new market structure. This had merits (modern facilities, clean slate) but also risks (high cost, long timeline). Some experts argue that refurbishing the existing market hall in phases – fixing the roof, updating stalls, improving signage and access – could have stabilized the market while a longer-term new build was planned. By not shoring up the current market, the council allowed conditions to deteriorate, which hurt footfall and trader revenues in the interim. A better strategy might have been a “dual-track” approach: invest modestly in the old market to keep it viable, while pursuing the new development in parallel. Instead, traders felt the old site was left to rot, reinforcing their “managed decline” fears.
Consistent Communication: Time and again, the council missed the chance to bring traders on the journey. For example, when the House of Fraser plan encountered issues (perhaps due to structural surveys or funding gaps), the council went quiet until they had a new plan (Argos) ready. This left a gap where rumors festered. Had the council openly said, “Plan A is proving difficult, we are evaluating Plan B options and will involve traders in that choice,” the eventual switch might have been less toxic. Transparency, even about bad news or delays, can build credibility – something the council did not grasp early enough.
Scale and Vision: Another point of contention is scale: the council (guided by outside consultants) concluded that a smaller market was the future – essentially downsizing a historically large market to fit a diminished demand. Traders, unsurprisingly, hate this idea; it feels like giving up on growth. Perhaps a more visionary leadershipwould have said, “No, Birkenhead deserves a market that we will grow into, not shrink to.” Successful market renewals elsewhere often involve expanding offerings (food halls, events, etc.) to draw new crowds, not permanently cutting space. The council’s more cautious, contraction-based approach could be seen as a strategic failure to imagine a flourishing market. It’s a classic leadership dilemma: do you plan for the market you have, or the market you want? Birkenhead’s leaders chose the former, which some view as a lack of ambition that could doom the project by alienating those very traders who provide the market’s character.
In summary, the accountability map points to a confluence of political missteps, bureaucratic opacity, and eroding stakeholder trust. While traders certainly acknowledge that external factors (like retail trends and COVID-19) harmed the market, they firmly hold that much of the pain was avoidable “if only the council had listened and led better”. The council now faces the daunting task of repairing this relationship while delivering a complex project – a task made harder by the fact that, in the eyes of many, they are trying to lead with a credibility deficit.
Conclusion & Lessons Learned
The tale of Birkenhead Market’s decline is sobering, not just for Wirral locals but for anyone concerned about the fate of Britain’s town centres. This venerable market survived the Victorian boom, wartime busts, and even literal fires, but it is now threatened by something less dramatic yet more insidious: the slow burn of poor governance and broken trust. What does this saga symbolize, and what can be learned from it?
A Symbol of the High Street’s Struggle: Birkenhead Market’s troubles encapsulate the broader challenges facing UK high streets. Traditional markets and downtown shops have been hit by shifting consumer habits, yes – but they suffer even more when local authorities lack a coherent, bold strategy to reinvent them. Here, the Wirral Council clearly recognised the need to rejuvenate the market (hence the plans and committees), yet the execution faltered.
The market became a political football and a planning quagmire. In many UK towns, one sees similar patterns: grand regeneration plans announced with fanfare, only to stall amid funding issues or local disagreements, leaving behind disillusionment. Birkenhead is now a case study in how not to manage such a project.
The Cost of Losing Trust: Perhaps the clearest lesson is that trust is a form of capital in regeneration – once spent, it’s hard to replenish. The Wirral Council’s credibility with Birkenhead Market traders and a segment of the public is at a low ebb. Every time a promise was broken or a question went unanswered, a bit more trust chipped away. By early 2025, traders weren’t just skeptical; they were openly hostile and disbelieving of anything officials said. This makes progress extraordinarily difficult – even positive steps are viewed through a lens of cynicism. For other councils, Birkenhead’s experience should be a warning: transparency and stakeholder engagement are not just PR niceties, they are crucial to getting buy-in for tough changes. If traders had been treated as partners rather than problems to manage, the narrative might have been very different.
Infrastructure and Vision Go Hand in Hand: Birkenhead Market also underscores that physical regeneration must align with a compelling vision. A market is not merely a building; it’s an ecosystem of people – traders, customers, suppliers, nearby businesses. The Council’s plans focused a lot on the physical move (from old hall to new site), but seemed to pay less attention to the human and cultural element. The idea of adding a cocktail bar and nightlife events, for example, isn’t bad in itself (many markets have successfully introduced food halls and bars to boost footfall). But if done to the traders rather than with them, it breeds resistance. Markets succeed when they evolve organically, with new features complementing, not displacing, the traditional core. The vision for Birkenhead Market’s revival should have been one that traders could get excited about too – not one that made them feel like relics in the way of a gentrification scheme.
Learning from Success Stories: There are positive models out there. Consider Altrincham Market in Greater Manchester – once a failing market, it was transformed into a thriving food and craft destination by visionary leadership that blended old and new. Key to its success was investing in quality (refurbishing the market hall beautifully) and clever marketing that re-engaged the community. Another example is Newcastle’s Grainger Market, which has managed to modernize (with events and diverse stalls) while keeping legacy traders on board. What these cases share is active collaboration between councils, traders, and often private partners, with a clear goal to enhance the market’s unique identity rather than erase it. Birkenhead could still emulate some of these tactics: for instance, ensuring that the new market includes affordable rents for small traders, a mix of traditional stalls (butchers, greengrocers) alongside trendy eateries, and programming that draws people in (farmers’ markets, craft fairs, etc.). A one-size-fits-all mall approach won’t work – a successful market regeneration needs to feel authentic to its place.
Accountability and Moving Forward: As this investigation highlights, there were multiple points where better leadership could have prevented the current mess. It is crucial that those in charge – both elected officials and council officers – are held accountable for the missteps. Not in a punitive sense, but to ensure learning and change. The council’s apology over misinformation and the new promises of transparency are a start, but actions will speak louder. Meaningful accountability might include setting up a joint council–traders steering group for the project, so that trader representatives are literally at the table for all major decisions from here on. It might also include external audits of the project’s progress every 6 months, with results made public, to rebuild public confidence that this time the timelines and budgets are real.
Finally, there’s a broader lesson about the value of public markets. Birkenhead’s market is not just a retail space – it’s part of the town’s heritage and soul. Allowing it to decay was not just an economic failure, but a cultural one. The fury of the long-standing traders is rooted in their sense of duty as custodians of that legacy. One trader’s sign in a stall summed it up poignantly: “Through fires, recessions and Tesco opening, we’re still here – is anyone listening?” The hope now is that belatedly, the answer will be “yes.” If Birkenhead Market is successfully reborn in a few years’ time, it could signal a turning point – showing that even after years of mismanagement, a community asset can be saved with collective will and accountable leadership. If it fails, it will stand as a cautionary tale of how easy it is to lose something irreplaceable through neglect and hubris.
Either way, the story of Birkenhead Market should prompt towns across the UK to take stock of their own markets and high streets. The lesson is clear: listen to your communities, back words with deeds, and never forget why these markets mattered in the first place. The light and strength in Birkenhead’s motto – “Ubi fides ibi lux et robur”(Where there is faith, there is light and strength) – came from the faith people had in institutions like the market.
Restore that faith, and you just might restore the market.
Sources:
Wirral History: Birkenhead’s original market (1835) and Old Market hall (1845); market hall fires in 1969 and 1974wirralhistory.ukwirralhistory.uk.
Contemporary News (Local Democracy Reporting Service & BBC): Traders fear Argos relocation will be “demise of Birkenhead as a market town”feeds.bbci.co.uk; Council investigation finds misleading information given about market rents, council apologisesfeeds.bbci.co.ukfeeds.bbci.co.uk.
ITV News (Granada): Market traders feel “ignored” by council, quote: “It’s just broken promises we have had”itv.com; Council accused of poor communication and lack of accountability by traders (Joe Orr and Tommy Roberts quotes)itv.comitv.com.
Liverpool Business News: Wirral Council shelved plan for new market at House of Fraser site (Dec 2023) and moved to Argos plan; public consultation on new designs in 2024lbndaily.co.uklbndaily.co.uk.
Wirral Council documents: Council took over Birkenhead Market in 2019 after 15 years private managementdemocracy.wirral.gov.uk; Birkenhead Market once enjoyed high footfall and success in its primedemocracy.wirral.gov.uk.
Birkenhead Market history and Wikipedia: 1977 market reopening after fire; integration with Pyramids Shopping Centreen.wikipedia.org; Historic significance of the market to the regional economymoveaheadbirkenhead.com.
Statements by Council Leader: Paul Stuart emphasizing market’s importance and potential in regenerationfeeds.bbci.co.uk.
Trader statements: BMTA vice-chair Greg McTigue on “demise of market town”feeds.bbci.co.uk; BMTA chair Joe Orr on traders promised a place in new market, now uncertainfeeds.bbci.co.uk.
Internal sources: Wirral Council masterplan vision for St. Werburgh’s Square and new market squarewirral.gov.uk; Economy Regeneration Committee Chair Tony Jones on vision for thriving townwirralview.com.
📜 Transparency Statement
This article is based on a wide range of publicly available sources, including Wirral Council meeting minutes (2020–2025), trader association statements, local press coverage, consultation documents, and regeneration reports. AI tools were used to extract timelines, identify patterns, and organise information across fragmented records. Every interpretation is based on these primary sources and shaped by human analysis.
No individual councillor or officer is accused of wrongdoing. The aim is to shine light on structural decisions and systemic issues that have affected the future of Birkenhead Market. The use of AI was strictly limited to text extraction and thematic sorting—not judgment or speculation.
Images used in this piece are included under fair use for the purposes of public commentary, criticism, and civic education. Where possible, I’ve credited all image sources appropriately. If you are the rights holder of an image and would prefer it to be removed or amended, please contact me directly.
As with any investigation drawn from incomplete or inconsistently published records, there may be omissions or factual inaccuracies. These are not intentional. If you notice anything that needs correction or clarification, please get in touch. Updates and corrections will be made transparently.
Because transparency isn’t optional—it’s the foundation for trust, accountability, and public progress.
Comments