Ed Miliband shakes hands with supporters after a speech at Bloxwich Leisure Centre on May 19, 2014 in Walsall. Photograph: Getty Images
Show Hide image

Miliband to make 10 visits on final day of campaigning

Labour leader will travel across five regions to promote ten "cost-of-living" pledges.

After announcing more policy in the last few weeks than any other leader in recent memory (including a ban on exploitative zero-hours contracts, a cap on rent increases, a GP appointment guarantee and an increase in the minimum wage), Ed Miliband plans to spend the final day of campaigning making 10 visits around the country, each one highlighting one of Labour's 10 pledges from its "cost-of-living contract". His tour, across five regions, will start in London and end in his constituency of Doncaster North. 

He said: 

Tomorrow I will be going all round England - north and south, east and west - laying out Labour's ten pledges from our cost of living contract.

I will be urging people to vote Labour on Thursday because I know Britain can do better than this.

And it is Labour MEPs and Labour councillors who can help deliver.

We have shown in this campaign the difference we can make: on housing, on the NHS, on wages, on immigration, on all of the major issues the country faces.

If I have heard one message most of all in this campaign, it is the depths of discontent about the way the country is run.

The challenges go beyond this government. And people are asking whether any political party can turn it round?

Can anyone rebuild the link between a hard day's work and ordinary family finances?

That link that used to be the foundation of our country's prosperity.

That used to guarantee the people of this country a decent life for them and tier families.

My answer is that Labour can and Labour will.

People should vote Labour on Thursday to make Britain better than this.

Vote Labour to make your family better off.

It certainly sounds tiring, but then Miliband is the man who, as climate change secretary, went without sleep for more than 48 hours in order to secure a deal at the Copenhagen summit. 

The tour will, however, provide journalists with plenty of chances to trip him up over the cost of staple items and the names of Labour council leaders. 

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Show Hide image

Who benefits, and who loses out, from David Cameron’s housing plan?

The prime minister’s plan to scrap the affordable rental homes requirement, explained.

What has Cameron actually announced about housing today?

In David Cameron’s closing speech to the Conservative Party conference in Manchester today, he announced plans to change the requirements to build affordable rented homes in new developments so developers can build "starter homes" instead of homes to be leased at affordable or social rents. 

The policy is geared toward ensuring that his party meets its campaign pledge of building 200,000 new homes by the close of this parliament, by taking the emphasis off renting (affordable housing requirements usually refer to rented, not owned houses) and onto owning. It should, claims Cameron, take us from “Generation Rent” to “Generation Buy".

What sort of houses will they build instead?

"Starter homes" are homes sold at 80 per cent of market rates to those under 40. These an be sold for a maximum of £450,000 in London, and £250,000 everywhere else. 

That sounds quite good!  

There is a chance that Cameron is right – that removing these obstacles will make developers move through the planning process more quickly, and will help boost the number or houses built. 

But (and this is a big but): most predictions so far are that this won’t happen, and if it does, it’ll only help a very specific demographic. As my colleague Stephen Bush has already pointed out, the announcement is good politics, but bad policy. It makes it look like Cameron is doing something about the housing crisis, while scoring points with big property developers along the way.

My colleague Jonn Elledge, meanwhile, notes that this system could actually slow down housebuilding, as the houses will take longer to sell than they would to let. Moreover, if housebuilding is more profitable in the long run, this will push up land – and therefore house – prices. 

Who'll benefit?

Tory voters and their children, in a nutshell. The starter homes will mostly be one or two bedrooms, and will be aimed at working couples.

Shelter calculated earlier this year that a couple would need a combined income of £76,957 in London and £50,266 in the rest of the UK to afford one of these homes, which makes it clear that they're aimed at well-off professionals. If you're in a stable relationship, earn £40,000 or £26,000 a year each and are looking to get on the housing ladder, you're in luck. 

Who won't it help? 

Everyone else. Under this policy, the Conservatives are effectively redefining “affordable”, just as they co-opted the phrase “living wage” earlier this year. By most peoples' definitions, a housing option only available to those with access to £80,000 in earnings a year is not affordable. The situation outside London is a little better. 

That’s not to say the affordable housing requirements were perfect before – these, too, were defined by some councils as 80 per cent of market rents, which in many places equates to anything but affordable. Yet removing the requirement for affordable rentals leaves nothing for those unable to afford to buy, leaving the squeezed lower-middle (and most young people) increasingly in the lurch.

Barbara Speed is a technology and digital culture writer at the New Statesman and a staff writer at CityMetric.