The controversial campaign literature. Photo: Twitter/@guardian
Show Hide image

"It's sad they've sunk to such depths": Tories use Ukip candidate's Turkish name on a leaflet

The Conservatives in Thurrock have been accused of "cheap" tactics by putting Ukip candidate Tim Aker's little-used full Turkish name on a campaign leaflet.

The constituency of Thurrock is going to be a tough battle in the build up to May. It has become a three-way marginal, with Ukip polling top and Labour scrabbling to beat it to unseating the Conservative MP, Jackie Doyle-Price, who has a majority of just 92 votes.

Perhaps in this messy political tangle, dirty campaigning is only to be expected. And indeed, the Conservatives in Thurrock have been accused of "incredibly cheap" tactics, by sending round a leaflet calling the Ukip candidate in the seat, Tim Aker, by his little-used full Turkish name, "Timür Aker". This is thought to be an incendiary move, considering the sensitive immigration concerns pervading the constituency.

"We feel it pretty sad that they've sunk to such depths," a Ukip source close to Aker tells me.

The Guardian has tweeted a picture of the leaflet, which also includes pictures of the radical clerics Abu Qatada and Abu Hamza:

Tim Aker, who is also an MEP for the southeast and Ukip's Policy Unit chief, is quoted in the Guardian giving his reaction to the leaflet:

I think they are just getting desperate. They will find anything. It is incredibly cheap of them. But freedom of speech is what it is and the public will judge them on it.

I am not calling on them to stop using the leaflet. They can carry on doing what they do. I am not going to try and stifle their rights to freedom of speech. But they have got to bear the responsibility for it.

Aker, whose father is Turkish, began to shorten his name to "Tim" when he was at school. His name is very rarely written in full, which is why it is thought to be a pointed move by the Tories on their campaign literature. However, Doyle-Price told the Telegraph that she does not consider this a "big deal". Although she admitted it was "childish", she said:

Frankly, I don't consider this a big deal at all . . .

If I'm honest with you I think by referring to his Turkish heritage we've actually given him credibility because frankly having roots from overseas is nothing to be ashamed of. Actually they are something to be proud of.

What we've done is actually broadcast the fact that Tim is just as much a citizen with diverse roots as anybody else in this country. It's probably going to do him a favour.

Anoosh Chakelian is deputy web editor at the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

How can Britain become a nation of homeowners?

David Cameron must unlock the spirit of his postwar predecessors to get the housing market back on track. 

In the 1955 election, Anthony Eden described turning Britain into a “property-owning democracy” as his – and by extension, the Conservative Party’s – overarching mission.

60 years later, what’s changed? Then, as now, an Old Etonian sits in Downing Street. Then, as now, Labour are badly riven between left and right, with their last stay in government widely believed – by their activists at least – to have been a disappointment. Then as now, few commentators seriously believe the Tories will be out of power any time soon.

But as for a property-owning democracy? That’s going less well.

When Eden won in 1955, around a third of people owned their own homes. By the time the Conservative government gave way to Harold Wilson in 1964, 42 per cent of households were owner-occupiers.

That kicked off a long period – from the mid-50s right until the fall of the Berlin Wall – in which home ownership increased, before staying roughly flat at 70 per cent of the population from 1991 to 2001.

But over the course of the next decade, for the first time in over a hundred years, the proportion of owner-occupiers went to into reverse. Just 64 percent of households were owner-occupier in 2011. No-one seriously believes that number will have gone anywhere other than down by the time of the next census in 2021. Most troublingly, in London – which, for the most part, gives us a fairly accurate idea of what the demographics of Britain as a whole will be in 30 years’ time – more than half of households are now renters.

What’s gone wrong?

In short, property prices have shot out of reach of increasing numbers of people. The British housing market increasingly gets a failing grade at “Social Contract 101”: could someone, without a backstop of parental or family capital, entering the workforce today, working full-time, seriously hope to retire in 50 years in their own home with their mortgage paid off?

It’s useful to compare and contrast the policy levers of those two Old Etonians, Eden and Cameron. Cameron, so far, has favoured demand-side solutions: Help to Buy and the new Help to Buy ISA.

To take the second, newer of those two policy innovations first: the Help to Buy ISA. Does it work?

Well, if you are a pre-existing saver – you can’t use the Help to Buy ISA for another tax year. And you have to stop putting money into any existing ISAs. So anyone putting a little aside at the moment – not going to feel the benefit of a Help to Buy ISA.

And anyone solely reliant on a Help to Buy ISA – the most you can benefit from, if you are single, it is an extra three grand from the government. This is not going to shift any houses any time soon.

What it is is a bung for the only working-age demographic to have done well out of the Coalition: dual-earner couples with no children earning above average income.

What about Help to Buy itself? At the margins, Help to Buy is helping some people achieve completions – while driving up the big disincentive to home ownership in the shape of prices – and creating sub-prime style risks for the taxpayer in future.

Eden, in contrast, preferred supply-side policies: his government, like every peacetime government from Baldwin until Thatcher’s it was a housebuilding government.

Why are house prices so high? Because there aren’t enough of them. The sector is over-regulated, underprovided, there isn’t enough housing either for social lets or for buyers. And until today’s Conservatives rediscover the spirit of Eden, that is unlikely to change.

I was at a Conservative party fringe (I was on the far left, both in terms of seating and politics).This is what I said, minus the ums, the ahs, and the moment my screensaver kicked in.

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