London independence
political movement in the United Kingdom
London independence, sometimes shortened to Londependence and Londexit, refers to a belief favouring full-fledged independence for Greater London as a city-state separate from the United Kingdom. The idea received particular attention after the 2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, in which the country at large voted to leave the European Union, but 60% of Londoners voted to remain, though the concept of an independent London had been discussed sporadically for some years before.
Movement
London's status within the United Kingdom has been debated for several years, with some calls for increased autonomy, Supporters have frequently cited Greater London's population of over 8 million people, its economic size, its global role, its diverse population and its unique challenges compared to the rest of England as reasons for greater autonomy. The idea of London becoming a city-state resurfaced during the Scottish independence referendum of 2014.
The movement for either increased autonomy or full sovereignty received a boost following the 2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum in 2016, during which the UK as a whole voted to leave the European Union (at under 52% leave), although the majority of London voted for the UK to remain in the EU (60% remain). This led to 180,000 Londoners petitioning Sadiq Khan, Mayor of London online to seek London's independence from the UK so it could remain part of the EU. Supporters cite London's status as a "world city" and its demographic and economic differences from the rest of the United Kingdom, and argue that it should become a city-state based on the model of Singapore, while remaining an EU member state.
Spencer, Lord Livermore of the Labour Party said that London's independence "should be a goal", arguing that a Greater London city-state would have twice the GDP of Singapore. Journalist Tony Travers argued that Khan would be "well within his rights to tell the government London didn't vote for Brexit and that City Hall now viewed the government as dysfunctional." Analyst Kevin Doran said that London becoming an independent state is not just possible, but inevitable "within 20 to 30 years' time."
After the EU referendum vote, Peter John, the Labour Party leader of the London Borough of Southwark stated it would be a "legitimate question" for London to consider its future in the United Kingdom and the European Union. Southwark had voted 72% in favour of remaining in the EU. John also said "London would be the 15th largest EU state, bigger than Austria, Denmark and Ireland and our values are in line with Europe – outward looking, confident of our place in the world, enriched by our diversity and stronger working together with our friends and neighbours than we are alone."
Labour MP for Tottenham David Lammy wrote a piece in the Evening Standard in March 2017 arguing in favour of London becoming a city state in the event of a Hard or No deal Brexit.
The Londependence Party was a registered political party and first stood candidates in the May 2021 London Assembly Elections.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “London independence” as political movement in the United Kingdom. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the history & society register because the source frames it as political movement in the United Kingdom. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
The record creator and administrative purpose are central evidence, because official documentation reflects both action and institutional priorities. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 29, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q24885001. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2016, 2014, 2017 and 2021.
Official terminology may obscure informal participation, dissent or communities documented only indirectly. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.
- Event chronology
- Institutional context
- Locating named record creators
Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “London independence”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow London independence primary sources, London independence archive and London research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “London independence”?
- Who created the surviving record, and for what administrative purpose?
- Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “London independence” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.