Voters cannot see Ed Miliband in power

The latest poll highlights the challenges that the Labour leader faces in Liverpool.

The Times has released its annual pre-conference poll (£), and it shows that Ed Miliband is still failing to command the support of his party.

The headline figures in the Populus poll show Labour holding the lead, with 38 per cent of the vote. The Conservatives are four points behind with 34 per cent, while the Liberal Democrats are on 12.

According to the poll, 63 per cent of the public cannot see Miliband as prime minister. Clearly, nearly a year after becoming Labour leader, Miliband is still struggling to connect with the public

Perhaps more worryingly -- and this is the figure the Times has focused on -- is that 49 per cent of Labour supporters also hold this view, with 22 per cent "strongly" agreeing. On this point, Labour voters are divided, as the other half - 47 per cent - believe that Miliband will be elected.

These figures are not good, and highlight the challenges faced by Miliband at the Labour Party conference in Liverpool this year. In his speech to delegates, he must try to define his leadership. While he has been praised for his reaction to events such as phone-hacking, there is doubt about whether this has reverberated outside the Westminster village, and he has yet to set out a clear programme for his party.

Labour holds the lead in the polls, but this is largely due to a drop in Tory support rather than positive gains. With his personal approval ratings still trailing behind David Cameron and Nick Clegg's, Miliband must convince his own party of his viability as a leader before he can convince the public.

UPDATE: 13.46

I've just had a call from Ed's press office, who are keen to highlight the fact that Ipsos MORI gives Miliband the highest net personal rating of the three leaders. These ratings give Clegg -25, Cameron -12, and Miliband -7. They also point out that this is almost exactly the same as Cameron's ratings after one year as leader, when his net approval was -6, and that Miliband's satisfaction rate of 36 per cent is higher than Cameron's was at any time until October 2007, when he had been leader for two years.

 

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

Getty
Show Hide image

The tale of Battersea power station shows how affordable housing is lost

Initially, the developers promised 636 affordable homes. Now, they have reduced the number to 386. 

It’s the most predictable trick in the big book of property development. A developer signs an agreement with a local council promising to provide a barely acceptable level of barely affordable housing, then slashes these commitments at the first, second and third signs of trouble. It’s happened all over the country, from Hastings to Cumbria. But it happens most often in London, and most recently of all at Battersea power station, the Thames landmark and long-time London ruin which I wrote about in my 2016 book, Up In Smoke: The Failed Dreams of Battersea Power Station. For decades, the power station was one of London’s most popular buildings but now it represents some of the most depressing aspects of the capital’s attempts at regeneration. Almost in shame, the building itself has started to disappear from view behind a curtain of ugly gold-and-glass apartments aimed squarely at the international rich. The Battersea power station development is costing around £9bn. There will be around 4,200 flats, an office for Apple and a new Tube station. But only 386 of the new flats will be considered affordable

What makes the Battersea power station development worse is the developer’s argument for why there are so few affordable homes, which runs something like this. The bottom is falling out of the luxury homes market because too many are being built, which means developers can no longer afford to build the sort of homes that people actually want. It’s yet another sign of the failure of the housing market to provide what is most needed. But it also highlights the delusion of politicians who still seem to believe that property developers are going to provide the answers to one of the most pressing problems in politics.

A Malaysian consortium acquired the power station in 2012 and initially promised to build 517 affordable units, which then rose to 636. This was pretty meagre, but with four developers having already failed to develop the site, it was enough to satisfy Wandsworth council. By the time I wrote Up In Smoke, this had been reduced back to 565 units – around 15 per cent of the total number of new flats. Now the developers want to build only 386 affordable homes – around 9 per cent of the final residential offering, which includes expensive flats bought by the likes of Sting and Bear Grylls. 

The developers say this is because of escalating costs and the technical challenges of restoring the power station – but it’s also the case that the entire Nine Elms area between Battersea and Vauxhall is experiencing a glut of similar property, which is driving down prices. They want to focus instead on paying for the new Northern Line extension that joins the power station to Kennington. The slashing of affordable housing can be done without need for a new planning application or public consultation by using a “deed of variation”. It also means Mayor Sadiq Khan can’t do much more than write to Wandsworth urging the council to reject the new scheme. There’s little chance of that. Conservative Wandsworth has been committed to a developer-led solution to the power station for three decades and in that time has perfected the art of rolling over, despite several excruciating, and occasionally hilarious, disappointments.

The Battersea power station situation also highlights the sophistry developers will use to excuse any decision. When I interviewed Rob Tincknell, the developer’s chief executive, in 2014, he boasted it was the developer’s commitment to paying for the Northern Line extension (NLE) that was allowing the already limited amount of affordable housing to be built in the first place. Without the NLE, he insisted, they would never be able to build this number of affordable units. “The important point to note is that the NLE project allows the development density in the district of Nine Elms to nearly double,” he said. “Therefore, without the NLE the density at Battersea would be about half and even if there was a higher level of affordable, say 30 per cent, it would be a percentage of a lower figure and therefore the city wouldn’t get any more affordable than they do now.”

Now the argument is reversed. Because the developer has to pay for the transport infrastructure, they can’t afford to build as much affordable housing. Smart hey?

It’s not entirely hopeless. Wandsworth may yet reject the plan, while the developers say they hope to restore the missing 250 units at the end of the build.

But I wouldn’t hold your breath.

This is a version of a blog post which originally appeared here.

0800 7318496