PMQs review: Miliband's fiercest attack yet on the welfare cuts

Labour leader says the government is hitting people "they don't meet and whose lives they will never understand".

Rarely has Ed Miliband sounded as outraged at the government as he did at today's PMQs. Challenging David Cameron on the coalition's welfare cuts, he declared: "They look after their friends, the people on their Christmas card list and, meanwhile, they hit people they don't meet and whose lives they will never understand." He turned George Osborne's rhetoric on its head by declaring that the Chancellor's cleaner would lose out "while his curtains are still drawn and he's still in bed." Despite the political risks (the majority of voters support the benefit cuts), this is a battle that Miliband has decided he must fight.

Cameron didn't deny that the 1 per cent cap on benefit increases would fall most heavily on working households ("everyone who is on tax credits will be affected by those changes," he said), rather he argued that the cap was necessary to reduce the welfare bill and pointed out that families would benefit from the large increase in the personal allowance. "This is the party for people who work, his is the party for unlimited welfare," he declared. In response, Miliband highlighted research by the Institute for Fiscal Studies showing that the average one earner couple will be £534 a year worse off by 2015, a point Cameron was unable to rebut.

But it was the personal, not the policy clashes, that were most memorable. After Cameron described Ed Balls as a bully who can "dish it out but can't take it", Miliband replied: "I've heard it all when the boy from the Bullingdon Club lectures people on bullying. Have you wrecked a restaurant recently?"

The Tories remain confident that voters will support their tough stance on the deficit and welfare, rather than Labour's. Conversely, Labour believes that the government has badly miscalculated by hitting the very "strivers" it claims to support. The outcome of the next election will likely rest on which is right. 

Labour leader Ed Miliband addresses a Trade Union Congress (TUC) rally in Hyde Park earlier this year. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Getty
Show Hide image

The deafening killer - why noise will be the next great pollution scandal

A growing body of evidence shows that noise can have serious health impacts too. 

Our cities are being poisoned by a toxin that surrounds us day and night. It eats away at our brains, hurts our hearts, clutches at our sleep, and gnaws at the quality of our daily lives.

Hardly a silent killer, it gets short shrift compared to the well-publicised terrors of air pollution and sugars food. It is the dull, thumping, stultifying drum-beat of perpetual noise.

The score that accompanies city life is brutal and constant. It disrupts the everyday: The coffee break ruined by the screech of a line of double decker buses braking at the lights. The lawyer’s conference call broken by drilling as she makes her way to the office. The writer’s struggle to find a quiet corner to pen his latest article.

For city-dwellers, it’s all-consuming and impossible to avoid. Construction, traffic, the whirring of machinery, the neighbour’s stereo. Even at home, the beeps and buzzes made by washing machines, fridges, and phones all serve to distract and unsettle.

But the never-ending noisiness of city life is far more than a problem of aesthetics. A growing body of evidence shows that noise can have serious health impacts too. Recent studies have linked noise pollution to hearing loss, sleep deprivation, hypertension, heart disease, brain development, and even increased risk of dementia.

One research team compared families living on different stories of the same building in Manhattan to isolate the impact of noise on health and education. They found children in lower, noisier floors were worse at reading than their higher-up peers, an effect that was most pronounced for children who had lived in the building for longest.

Those studies have been replicated for the impact of aircraft noise with similar results. Not only does noise cause higher blood pressure and worsens quality of sleep, it also stymies pupils trying to concentrate in class.

As with many forms of pollution, the poorest are typically the hardest hit. The worst-off in any city often live by busy roads in poorly-insulated houses or flats, cheek by jowl with packed-in neighbours.

The US Department of Transport recently mapped road and aircraft noise across the United States. Predictably, the loudest areas overlapped with some of the country’s most deprived. Those included the south side of Atlanta and the lowest-income areas of LA and Seattle.

Yet as noise pollution grows in line with road and air traffic and rising urban density, public policy has turned a blind eye.

Council noise response services, formally a 24-hour defence against neighbourly disputes, have fallen victim to local government cuts. Decisions on airport expansion and road development pay scant regard to their audible impact. Political platforms remain silent on the loudest poison.

This is odd at a time when we have never had more tools at our disposal to deal with the issue. Electric Vehicles are practically noise-less, yet noise rarely features in the arguments for their adoption. Just replacing today’s bus fleet would transform city centres; doing the same for taxis and trucks would amount to a revolution.

Vehicles are just the start. Millions were spent on a programme of “Warm Homes”; what about “Quiet Homes”? How did we value the noise impact in the decision to build a third runway at Heathrow, and how do we compensate people now that it’s going ahead?

Construction is a major driver of decibels. Should builders compensate “noise victims” for over-drilling? Or could regulation push equipment manufacturers to find new ways to dampen the sound of their kit?

Of course, none of this addresses the noise pollution we impose on ourselves. The bars and clubs we choose to visit or the music we stick in our ears. Whether pumping dance tracks in spin classes or indie rock in trendy coffee shops, people’s desire to compensate for bad noise out there by playing louder noise in here is hard to control for.

The Clean Air Act of 1956 heralded a new era of city life, one where smog and grime gave way to clear skies and clearer lungs. That fight still goes on today.

But some day, we will turn our attention to our clogged-up airwaves. The decibels will fall. #Twitter will give way to twitter. And every now and again, as we step from our homes into city life, we may just hear the sweetest sound of all. Silence.

Adam Swersky is a councillor in Harrow and is cabinet member for finance. He writes in a personal capacity.