Labour leader reveals his views on housing

Miliband reveals thoughts on housing and localism

03/06/2011 | By Rhiannon Bury

Labour leader Ed Miliband has slammed government plans to introduce fixed-term tenancies, in an exclusive interview about his housing plans.

Mr Miliband told Inside Housing that abolishing secure tenancies would create a disincentive to work since tenants can be moved on when their situation improves. The coalition government plans to introduce a minimum tenancy of two years through legislation in the Localism Bill.

‘[The plans] make a mockery of the government’s promise to “make work pay”,’ Mr Miliband said. ‘Abolishing secure tenancies and threatening to kick future tenants out of their homes when they get a promotion or a pay rise will create fear and uncertainty, and provide a disincentive to work.’
Reform and modernisation of the housing sector was important but this should be done by better understanding tenants’ needs, he added.

‘Social housing should not be immune to reform, but we are opposed to the government’s plans on tenancy reform,’ he said (see box: Ed Miliband on…).

Labour MPs tabled amendments to the Localism Bill, which has now reached the House of Lords, to fight the changes to secure tenancies but they were not passed.

Abolishing secure tenancies and threatening to kick future tenants out of their homes when they get a promotion or a pay rise will create fear and uncertainty, and provide a disincentive to work
Ed Miliband

Mr Miliband also criticised changes to the planning system, but conceded that ‘some criticism of regional planning was legitimate’.

‘We have already seen a dramatic fall in planning consents for new homes, not least because of the uncertainty caused by these chaotic and botched planning reforms. This is exactly the wrong thing to do if we want to help the next generation get on in life,’ he added.

In a speech last month, Mr Miliband outlined his ‘British Promise’ - a plan to make sure the next generation does better than the last - and said housing was one of his five priorities.

Shadow communities and local government secretary Caroline Flint is leading a major review of the Labour Party’s housing policy, with an interim report due this summer. The review is examining all aspects of the party’s housing policy across the private, social rented and owner-occupied sectors.

Helen Williams, assistant director of neighbourhoods at the National Housing Federation, said: ‘Mr Miliband is right to highlight the potential benefits of lifetime tenancies and we expect social landlords to continue to have the flexibility to offer these alongside fixed-term options in the future.’

Ed Miliband on…

The Labour Party’s housing review
‘One key task I have set for the Labour Party’s policy review is to look at how we can stop the inexorable rise in the average age of homeownership.’

Planning
‘We have argued that the bank bonus tax should be extended for another year and that part of the revenue raised should be used to build new affordable homes.’

The benefits of housing
‘Good housing means a happier and healthier lifestyle for people in communities across the country.Pleasant, clean and secure surroundings are important for everyone’s well-being. Housing impacts fundamentally on health, on the educational and future career opportunities of our children, and on every aspect of quality of life.’

Localism
‘The government’s proposed new laws on localism are a sham and do not give people a real say in how their local area is run.’

Readers' comments (16)

McMadman | 03/06/2011 9:24 am
Hey Edd the Duck.

How many Council Houses did Liebore bulid when in power ?

Why would Liebore only write off debt under stock transfer, but not if satock was retained ?

I think we should be told, but of course we won't.

Edd is quackers if he thinks we're buying his nonsense.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Alpha One | 03/06/2011 9:37 am
So another misleading headline then!

These are Ed's thoughts, it's the same anti-government rhetoric that he's been spouting for months, with a little bit of flesh on his arguement!

How about, Mr Ed, you shut up criticising until you have a credible alternative!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
business_ninja | 03/06/2011 9:54 am
Alpha One, agreed! - the government's plans aren't perfect by any means, we absolutely need to offer support to bridge the gap between being 'too well off for social housing but not rich enough to buy' but Labour need to offer a solution, not a critique.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Chris | 03/06/2011 10:36 am
Alpha - I must agree. There is a credible alternative, a socialist alternative, that the leader of the oppostion should be putting. If he is too afraid to do the job that needs to be done, and to overcome the massive indictment against the Labour Movement that was Blair, then he should wait until he is clearly for something rather than meekly being randomly against day-by-day nothingness.

Blair's power at any cost abandonment of central principle was more wrong than can be described. If Labour is to ever return as a credible alternative then it must be an alternative, not a softer version of what has failed, and is failing the nation. The flag of principle can be planted again at the heart of the nation where people can rally to what is right. If this does not mean immediate power then that is the majority will, but what it will have given is a return to alternative argument and viable opposition such that truly mitigated the worse excesses of capitalism for most of the last century.

Milliband has the intellect, but now he needs the fire of conviction, and determination to be the focus of a new socialism. Without it he lacks respect, belief, and trust.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Michael Dixon | 03/06/2011 11:19 am
What did Labour achieve with 13 years of power? A pathetic record on social house building and so far a blank piece of paper on housing, when they should have been up and running from May 2010, after a long spell in government.

We need some proposals that will assist those living in overcrowded accommodation, while others under-use their properties and can do for ever. Social housing is for those who need help and the status quo is just not acceptable.

Nationally Labour have nothing new to offer; they are sidelined and an irrelevance. Milliband's words are just a load of meaningless froth.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Rick Campbell | 03/06/2011 12:29 pm
Michael Dixon states " Milliband's words are just a load of meaningless froth. "

I have to disagree from an anatomical viewpoint as 'meaningless froth' infers something entering a mouth whereas Ed's words appear to be egressing from a more southerly part of his anatomy.

It has been obvious for years that what tenants want centres around a stable and cheap home, a decent home in a decent areas with decent neighbours.

It isn't rocket surgery or brain science is it?

People well understand the principle of 'you get what you pay for' and that if you are a socia;l hoising tenant you will be demonised as the scum of the earth.

Blue Labour pushed council rents up to unprecedented highs to make 'rents fairer' -- in fact this was code for 'you will be paying the same rent as housing associations but getting less for your money - so why not transfer? '

Social housing tenants are not only the new cash cow but also are the new 'whipping boy' for the greedy and pathetic to demonise.

The words "Germany", the 1930s" and "nazis" easily spring to mind as a warning rtather than as a statement.

So what's the answer folks? Well, there isn't one -- tere's several but one of them isn't travelling about the country in a pink camper van.

Yers, it is easier to criticise than to come up with a solution even if it be a part solution but the essence of any solution should be one besed not on fear of eviction for improving one's life but on one of deciding what level of service/standard that you want and paying for that level?

I suspect that will not find favour with many posters but I beleive (although not everyone may) that diverse opinions can bring forth a consesus that is workable -- unless, of course, you know different and want to slag off me and/or any other poster with altruistic tendencies?

AND before anyone wades in with abuse -- I would draw their attention to the squiggly things called question marks -- that's a big clue, in that there are questions posed in order to stimulate discussion not abuse.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Rick Campbell | 03/06/2011 12:32 pm
Methinx I should point out that the inordinate number of typos in my above post are not intentional -- my current physical condition somewhat restricts 'proper' typing taking place.

'Normal'service', with a bit of luck, may resume soon.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Chris | 03/06/2011 1:17 pm
What typo's ;-)

The past 30 years of housing policy has been driven by fear. Fear of everyday people feeling free and as a result of that freedom defending their equality in society. When social housing was the tenure of choice, and truly mixed communities resulted, the worry of risking your home if you dissented against the ruling class was removed. Arguing for a fairer share of profits from your work, or a fairer part in the society you built, was less of a dream and more of a reality - but a nightmare for the elite who saw their un-hard-earned riches threatened by an nth of a percent.

The response has been as total as when Hitler entered Poland - no quarter given and all with leadership potential slaughtered - the trampling over rights and the enforcement of insecurity and fear.

The solution is as obvious as the resistance mounted by the Warsaw Ghetto - refuse to fear, refuse to submit, and fight for the nation we once owned. In terms of housing that means restoring social rent as the tenure of choice, and to do so means making it an available option once more.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Narra | 03/06/2011 1:36 pm
More of the same from Labour. "This is bad, Tories are bad, you should vote for us!"

But what are your alternatives!

"Did you not hear how BAD they are!"

Reminds me of the last election video they ran, with a man in a blue suit punching a bag interspliced with tales from people the Tories would hurt with their cuts. Utterly nothing explaining how Labour would deal with the public debt while not effecting these people. I am sure they're are alternatives, but until Labour actually start laying some of them out, I'll be staying far away.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Gresley | 03/06/2011 5:25 pm
Judge a man by his actions and not his words. Apply that principle to Blue Labour and the judgement is pretty damning. The same old right wing, laissez neo-liberal damage only with a slightly sweeter smile. Ed Milibrain is Blue Labour. Indeed he can't criticise Con/LibDem policy because, in essence, the policy is just the next step down the stairs to hell that Blue Labour happily trod between 1997 and 2010. He and Blue Labour offer no alternative to the Con/LibDem.

An alternative that would:
Mean that people would not spend up more than £300,000 on rent to a private slumlord before being to bable their own home - why not give them the chance to pay that £300,000 to buy a home of their own by reforming the financial sector?
Provide a truly mixed housing system, with social housing provided at affordable rents for people who don't want to buy - affordable over sixty years and for thirty years after 1045, responsible for the biggest improvement in housing conditions this country has ever seen.
Use the wealth being shovelled into the banks to support productive investment instead - like direct building of homes using locally sourced materials and tools.

All of which were once, believe it or not, not a million miles away from Tory policy back in the days of MacMillan! How sad that the leader of the party supposedly set up to represent the interests of the majority, is now to the right of an aristocrat like SuperMac...
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment