Labour should be "reformers of the state", says Miliband

In his first major interview since becoming Labour leader, Ed Miliband promises "profound" reform to

Nearly two months after becoming Labour leader, Ed Miliband has given his first major interview to the Guardian.

In it, he promises to launch the "long, hard road" back to power with profound change to the Labour Party and a focus on inequality. A commission on party organisation will be launched this weekend, examining the role of the unions and the rules under which he was elected leader. Amid stories of in-fighting and apparent public disagreement from the shadow chancellor Alan Johnson over university funding and the top rate of tax, Miliband responds to the criticism that he has been too inactive since becoming leader, and reaffirms his support for the 50p tax rate.

On the slow start

It's about digging in, and it's not about short-term fixes, nor shortcuts to success. There is a long, hard road for us to travel.

On the deficit

I don't agree with what the Tories say about us overspending. They are on a mission and we know what their mission is and we have got to take them on. Their mission is to say 'This deficit is not the result of an international banking crisis, it is the result of a crisis in government'.

On the 50p tax rate

[Asked if the 50p rate was simply necessary to cut the deficit] No, it's about statement about values and fairness and about the kind of society you believe in and it's important to me.

One of the things that gets me out of bed in the morning and that I care about is that Britain is a fundamentally unequal society and that's the reason I said what I said about the 50p rate.

On the role of the state

I think it's very clear that as we are reformers of the market -- we should also need to be reformers of the state. I don't consider myself a sort of statist. The top-down idea of the state is as much of a problem as an idealised view of the market and in a way they have their similarities. Both treat people not as people but as kind of objects.

On reforming Labour

I am talking about change as profound as the change New Labour brought because the world itself has changed massively, and we did not really change fundamentally as a party, or come to terms with the changes, and have not done so since 1994.

Samira Shackle is a freelance journalist, who tweets @samirashackle. She was formerly a staff writer for the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

David Cameron’s starter homes: poor policy, but good politics

David Cameron's electoral coalition of buy-to-let retirees and dual-earner couples remains intact: for now.

The only working age demographic to do better under the Coalition was dual-earner couples – without children. They were the main beneficiaries of the threshold raise – which may “take the poorest out of tax” in theory but in practice hands a sizeable tax cut to peope earning above average. They will reap the fruits of the government’s Help to Buy ISAs. And, not having children, they were insulated from cuts to child tax credits, reductions in public services, and the rising cost of childcare. (Childcare costs now mean a couple on average income, working full-time, find that the extra earnings from both remaining in work are wiped out by the costs of care)

And they were a vital part of the Conservatives’ electoral coalition. Voters who lived in new housing estates on the edges of seats like Amber Valley and throughout the Midlands overwhelmingly backed the Conservatives.

That’s the political backdrop to David Cameron’s announcement later today to change planning to unlock new housing units – what the government dubs “Starter Homes”. The government will redefine “affordable housing”  to up to £250,000 outside of London and £450,000 and under within it, while reducing the ability of councils to insist on certain types of buildings. He’ll describe it as part of the drive to make the next ten years “the turnaround decade”: years in which people will feel more in control of their lives, more affluent, and more successful.

The end result: a proliferation of one and two bedroom flats and homes, available to the highly-paid: and to that vital component of Cameron’s coalition: the dual-earner, childless couple, particularly in the Midlands, where the housing market is not yet in a state of crisis. (And it's not bad for that other pillar of the Conservative majority: well-heeled pensioners using buy-to-let as a pension plan.)

The policy may well be junk-rated but the politics has a triple A rating: along with affluent retirees, if the Conservatives can keep those dual-earner couples in the Tory column, they will remain in office for the forseeable future.

Just one problem, really: what happens if they decide they want room for kids? Cameron’s “turnaround decade” might end up in entirely the wrong sort of turnaround for Conservative prospects.

Stephen Bush is editor of the Staggers, the New Statesman’s political blog.