Ed Miliband’s Fabian Conference Speech

12th January, 2013 11:21 am

It is great to be here at the Fabians.

Today I want to talk to you about the idea of One Nation.

The idea of a country which we rebuild together, where everyone plays their part.

It is not an idea rooted in Fabian pamphlets.

Though I bow to nobody in being an avid reader of them.

It is not an idea either rooted in academic studies of Sweden or any other country.

Though as some of you know, again I can talk at length about these subjects too.

It is an idea rooted deep in British history.

Because it is rooted deep in the soul of the British people.

Deep in the daily way we go about our lives.

Our relationships with our family, our friends, our neighbours.

We know this idea is a deep part of our national story because we have so many different ways of describing it.

“All hands to the pump.”

“Mucking in.”

“Pulling your weight.”

“Doing your bit.”

And every day we see it at work in our country.

On Christmas Day, I helped out somebody down the street from me who makes Christmas lunches for elderly people in the area living on their own, it’s that spirit.

The same spirit we saw last year in the Olympic Games.

Now because this idea is so much part of who we are as a nation, of how we think of ourselves, all politicians try to embrace it.

But its real potential, and what I want to talk about today, comes when we understand the deeper lesson for the way we run our country.

Turning this spirit of collective endeavour, of looking out for each other, from something we do in our daily lives, to the way our nation is run.

That is what One Nation Labour is about.

Taking the common decency and values of the British people and saying we must make it the way we run the country as well.

And why does this idea – the idea of One Nation – speak so directly to the state of Britain today?

Because we are so far from being One Nation.

While a very few people at the top are doing well, so many people feel their prospects diminishing, their insecurity rising.

They feel on their own.

Not part of a common endeavour.

You know, a young woman came up to me recently and told me she had decided to go to University in Holland because she said she couldn’t afford to do so in Britain.

Believe it or not, to a government minister her departure will seem a success because if more people leave the country it will help them meet their net migration target.

But it doesn’t feel like a success to me to have talented young people fleeing abroad.

In Britain that young woman doesn’t feel part of a country where she can play her part, she feels on her own.

And it’s not just our young people who are finding it so hard to do their bit.

There are so many people across Britain who want to play their part but don’t feel they can.

Those running small businesses are struggling just to keep their business afloat in the face of rising energy bills and banks that won’t help.

They don’t feel part of a Britain we rebuild together, they feel on their own.

And then take all the people struggling to make ends meet, to pay the bills, doing two or three jobs, they feel on their own with nobody on their side.

So what do so many people in Britain have in common today?

They believe the system is rigged against them.
They believe that the country isn’t working for them.
And you know, it’s not that any of them thinks Britain owes them a living or an easy life.

All they want is a sense of hope, they want to believe there is a vision for a future we can build together.

And that is why One Nation is such a powerful idea right now: because it is about our country and what it faces.

Can David Cameron answer this call for One Nation?

This week shows yet again why he can’t.

What did they call it on Monday?

The Ronseal re-launch.

But what did we discover?

The tin was empty.

And they have no vision for the country.

And what have we also seen this week?

The appalling attempt to denigrate all those who are looking for work.

To pretend that a Bill that hits 7 million working people is somehow promoting responsibility.

And all the time an attempt to divide the country between so-called scroungers and strivers.

To point the finger of blame at others, so people don’t point the finger of blame at this government.

Nasty, divisive politics which we should never accept.

It should be the first duty of any Prime Minister to be able to walk in the shoes of others.

This week he has shown he just can’t do it.

No empathy.

And no vision either.

So my overwhelming feeling in looking at this government is simple:

Britain can do better than this.

I have said what it means to be a One Nation Prime Minister.

To strive always to walk in the shoes of others.

But One Nation tells us more than that.

It tells us that we need to bring the country together so everyone can play their part.

And let me explain what One Nation is about in our economy, our society and our politics.

Let me start with the economy.

One Nation Labour is about reshaping our economy from its foundations, so that all do have the opportunity to play their part, not just a few.

And to understand what a One Nation economy means, we need to recognise how it differs from what New Labour did and also how it differs from the current government.

New Labour rightly broke from Old Labour and celebrated the power of private enterprise to energise our country.

It helped get people back into work, and introduced the minimum wage and tax credits to help make work pay.

And it used tax revenues to overcome decades of neglect and invest in hospitals, schools and the places where people live.

There are millions of people who have better lives because of those decisions.

It is a far cry from what we see today.

We’re back to the old trickle-down philosophy.

Cut taxes for the richest.

For everyone else, increase insecurity at work to make them work harder.

In other words, for the 99 per cent: you’re on your own.

Sink or swim.

For the top 1 per cent: we’ll cut your taxes.

We don’t need a crystal ball to know what this will mean, because the last two and a half years have shown us.

Business as usual at the banks, squeezed living standards, a stagnating economy.

No plan for rebuilding the British economy.

But the One Nation Labour solution is not to say that we need to go back to the past, to carry on as we did in government.

One Nation Labour learns the lessons of the financial crisis.

It begins from the truth that New Labour did not do enough to take on the vested interests and bring about structural change in our economy.

To make it an economy that works for the many not just the few.

From the banks on our high streets to the City of London to the big energy companies.

Now, New Labour did challenge the old trickle-down economics by redistributing from the top.

But again it didn’t do enough to change our economy so that it grew from the middle out, not from the top down.

One Nation Labour is explicitly about reshaping our economy so that it can help what I call the forgotten wealth creators of Britain.

The millions of men and women who work the shifts, put in the hours.

Who are out to work while George Osborne’s curtains are still closed.

And are still out at work when he has gone to bed.

Those who have gone to university and those who haven’t.

The people who don’t take home millions or hundreds of thousands, but make a hard, honest and difficult living.

These are the people on whom our future national prosperity truly depends.

So what do we need to do today?

We need to reform our economy.

To take on the vested interests that block the opportunities for our small businesses and for all the other forgotten wealth-creators.

We need a new deal for our small businesses who have been let down by the banks.

We have to tackle short-termism in the City to enable companies to play their part to contribute to long-term wealth creation.

We have to work with business radically to reform our apprenticeships and vocational education, so we use the talents of all young people, including the 50 per cent who don’t go to University.

And we have to promote a living wage to make work pay.

That is the way that we rebuild our economy.

From the middle out.

Not from the top down.

That’s what One Nation Labour is about in the economy.

So we learn the lesson of New Labour’s successes, embracing wealth creation.

We learn the lessons of what it didn’t do well enough, reshaping our economy and creating shared prosperity.

And we recognise there will be less money around because of the deficit we inherit.

That’s why Ed Balls rightly came to this conference last year, to say if we were in government today we would have to put jobs in the public sector ahead of pay increases.

And in a way that we did not have to be under New Labour, we will have to be ruthless in the priorities we have. And clear that we will have to deliver more with less.

So One Nation Labour adapts to new times, in particular straitened economic circumstances.
And the power of the idea of One Nation also shapes the kind of society I believe in.
One Nation Labour is based on a Britain we rebuild together.
That means sharing the vision of a common life, not a country divided by class, race, gender, income and wealth.

And that’s so far from where we are in Britain today.

We can only build that kind of society, where we share a common life, if people right across it, from top to bottom, feel a sense of responsibility to each other.

Now, New Labour, unlike Old Labour, pioneered the idea of rights and responsibilities.

From crime to welfare to anti-social behaviour, it was clear that we owe duties to each other as citizens.

It knew we do not live as individuals on our own.

And it knew that strong confident communities are the way that you build a strong confident nation.

All of this is so far again from what we have seen from this government.

This government preaches responsibility.

But do nothing to make it possible for people to play their part.

They demand people work, but won’t take the basic action to ensure that the work is available.

They talk about a “big society”.

But then it makes life harder for our charities, our community groups.

But here again the answer is not simply to carry on where we left off in government.

New Labour was right to talk about rights and responsibilities but was too timid in enforcing them, especially at the top of society.

And it was too sanguine about the consequences of rampant free markets which we know can threaten our common way of life.

Learning from our history, One Nation Labour is clear that we need to do more to create a society where everyone genuinely plays their part.

A One Nation country cannot be one:
Where Chief Executive pay goes up and up and up and everybody else’s is stagnant.
Where major corporations are located in Britain, sell in Britain, make profits in Britain but do not pay taxes in Britain.
And where at the top of elite institutions, from newspapers to politics, some people just seem to believe that the rules do not apply to them.
To turn things round in Britain, we all have to play our part.
Especially in hard times.
We are right to say that responsibility should apply to those on social security.

But we need to say that responsibility matters at the top too.

That’s the essence of One Nation Labour.

It shares New Labour’s insight about our obligations to each other.

And it learns the lessons of what New Labour didn’t do well enough, ensuring responsibilities go all the way through society from top to bottom.

And what does One Nation Labour mean for the way we do our politics?

It starts from the idea that people should have more power and control over their lives, so that everyone feels able to play their part, not left on their own.

New Labour began with a bold agenda for the distribution of power in Britain.

And it stood for a Labour party not dominated by one sectional interest, but reaching out into parts of Britain that Old Labour had never spoken to.

Inviting people from all walks of life to join the party and to play their part.

It wanted too, to open up our system of government and oversaw the biggest Constitutional changes for generations, including devolution to Scotland and Wales.

The contrast with this government is clear.

The way they operate, the high-handed arrogance of their way of doing things.

They cannot claim to be opening up politics.

And they certainly cannot claim to be rooted in the lives of the British people.

But once again we have to move on from New Labour, as well as from this government.

Because although New Labour often started with the right intentions, over time it did not do enough to change the balance of power in this country.

That was true of the Labour Party itself.

Of our democracy.

And of our public services.

By the time we left office, too many people in Britain didn’t feel as if the Labour party was open to their influence, or listening to them.

Take immigration.

I am proud to celebrate the multi-ethnic, diverse nature of Britain.

But high levels of migration were having huge effects on the lives of people in our country.

And too often those in power seemed not to accept this.

The fact that they didn’t explains partly why people turned against us in the last general election.

So we must work to ensure that it never happens again.

And what is the lesson for One Nation Labour?

It is to change the way that power and politics works in our own Party right away.

That is what you will be seeing from One Nation Labour in 2013.

Opening up in new ways.

Recruiting MPs from every part of British life: from business to the military to working people from across every community.

Seeking support in every part of the United Kingdom, across the South of the country as well as the North.

Building a party that is dedicated to working with people to help them improve their own lives—even before government.

So for example, Labour Party members going to door to door offering people practical to help switch energy suppliers and cut their bills.

Creating a policy-making process that enables people directly to shape our policies so that they reflect their own concerns.

Jonathan Primett from Chatham wrote to us recently, complaining about rogue landlords at a time when the private rented sector is growing fast in our country.

Today I want to respond to him.

Britain is in danger of having two nations divided between those who own their one homes and those who rent.

If we are going to build One Nation, people who rent their homes should have rights and protections as well.

That’s about rooting out the rogue landlords.

Stopping families being ripped off by letting agents.

And giving new security to families who rent.

So we will introduce a national register of landlords, to give greater powers for local authorities to root out and strike off rogue landlords.

We will end the confusing, inconsistent fees and charges in the private rented sector.

And we will seek to give greater security to families who rent and remove the barriers that stand in the way of longer term tenancies.

That is a real example of how a One Nation Labour Party, by opening up our politics, is responding to the new challenges that the British people care about today.

One Nation Labour is also practising a new approach to campaigning—through community organising—which doesn’t just seek to win votes but build new relationships in every part of Britain.

For example, taking up local issues from high streets dominated by betting shops to taking on payday loan companies.

And, of course, a One Nation Labour government should open up too.

If devolution to Scotland and Wales is right, so it must be right that the next Labour government devolves power to local government in England.

And reforms our public services so that the people who use them and the people that work in them, feel as if they have a real chance of shaping the way they operate.

That’s the way to ensure we can all work together, to rebuild our country, with everyone playing their part.

That’s what One Nation Labour is about.

It learns the lesson of New Labour’s successes, seeking to reach out to parts of Britain that Old Labour ignored.

It learns the lessons of what it didn’t do well enough, of where New Labour left people behind.

And it recognises that in 2013, as the world has changed, politics has to change with it.

I talked about it in my Labour Party conference speech a few months ago about why I came into politics.

It was because of my personal faith.

A faith that we are better, stronger together than when we are on our own.

A faith that when good people come together they can overcome any odds.

For me, that’s what One Nation Labour is all about.

This faith isn’t unique to me.

It is deeply rooted in our country.

One Nation Labour is different from the current government.

And from New Labour and Old Labour too.

It will take on the vested interests in order to reshape our economy in the interests of all.

It will insist on responsibility throughout society, including at the top so we can build a united, not divided, Britain.

It will strive to spread power as well as working for prosperity.

We must build One Nation.

It is what the British people demand of us.

And, together, it is what we can achieve.

Value our free and unique service?

LabourList has more readers than ever before - but we need your support. Our dedicated coverage of Labour's policies and personalities, internal debates, selections and elections relies on donations from our readers.

If you can support LabourList’s unique and free service then please click here.

To report anything from the comment section, please e-mail [email protected]
  • AlanGiles

    One tired old cliche’ after another.

    Cut up in one line chunks

    The easier to read off the autocue

    I suppose I ought to say One Nation at this point

    Because I know you are waiting for it.

    One nation – there I’ve said it again

    That is why I came into politics.

    To stand here and deliver the same speech

    Time and time again

    Control private landlords – because we haven’t got the will

    To build council housing

    And that might upset the Daily Express strivers

    You can applaud now, so I can take a sip of water.

    One nation.

    A catchphrase for the many not the few

    What I stand for is as clear as mud

    But who cares?

    At least I don’t talk in sentences

    • aracataca

      Someone else has already told you where you can stick your snide remarks Alan

      • Quiet_Sceptic

        To be fair Alan makes some valid points.

        It’s all very nebulous stuff, perhaps it may resonate when delivered to an intellectual audience like the Fabians but I can’t see it having much impact in the outside world.

        The other issue is that the One Nation project (and before that, the ‘squeezed middle’ theme) seems to be stuck at the ‘problem identification stage’, which let’s be honest is the easy bit. At some stage we need to start identifying how we are going to solve these.

        • aracataca

          But we are 3 years from an election. A significant change of course is being marked out here.

          Alan doesn’t and never has offered any alternative whatsoever. In terms of delivering a point of view (which of course is one angle from where he criticises EM here)-if AG could spell a word correctly that would be a bloody miracle- the man is semi-literate.

          • aracataca

            Thank you for your kind, generous and (as always) well thought out remarks.

          • aracataca

            Now that you have explained your position so well I can see that your attack on EM wasn’t crude, simplistic or unfair at all and came from a colossus of eloquence and erudition. Is it too late to beg your forgiveness?

        • What concerns me is that One Nation could be Ed’s equivalent of Tony Blair’s ‘stakeholder’ concept – it may all come to nothing following a successful general election campaign.

          To me it doesn’t seem at all obvious that there has been any moving on from New Labour – just think of the antics surrounding Sarah Parachute of Rotherham and of course, much of the old guard are still present and wield influence. The Labour Party appears to have learnt nothing.

          This doesn’t mean Labour can’t win the next election (or perhaps more appositely: the Tories, at the moment, look set to lose it) but it does mean there’s not much to get excited about and in all probability, the switch from a Tory to a Labour government may turn out to be little more than a rebranding event.

          • aracataca

            This is of course incorrect in almost every respect. The party is clearly moving on from the New Labour era. EM made that abundantly clear in today’s speech. We are at the embryonic stage of developing policies for the next election (such as today’s commitment to regulate private landlords and last week’s proposal to offer guaranteed jobs for the long term unemployed). As an opposition the policies have to be connected to a critique of the present government. Disappointingly, you appear to reject these new policies out of hand and in remarkably short shrift. However, I do believe congratulations are in order since last week you were telling us what WILL happen at the next general election whereas your knowledge of the future now only constitutes a ‘probability’. Your psychic powers are slipping but to me that’s progress.

          • This is where difficutlty is encountered: “EM made that abundantly clear in today’s speech.” Blair also made an alternative to Tory sleeze and Tory economic squalor abundantly apparent with his ‘stakeholder’ concept – but it didn’t happen once elected. And if you want an example of current actual practice: what kind of an alternative does Blunkett present with his £49,500 rolling contract with News Corp? Currently Blunkett is campaigning against press regulation – think about it.

            For me, “abundantly clear” status won’t be achieved until we have more than words.

            BTW – nothing has happened to change my view: if Labour adopt a more pragmatic approach on the economy (i.e. depart from neo-liberal trickle-down ideology) the Progress wing will walk. I was an L.P. member when Sainsbury bankrolled the SDP/Gang of Four flounce-out. They flexed their muscles again during the London mayoralty campaign, in effect preferring Johnson to Livingstone. There should be no surprise if they eventually prefer Cameron (by way of a ‘principled’ walk-out/abstention) to a Labour leader who is prepared to pinion predator capitalism.

          • aracataca

            First half of what you say = ‘what aboutery’, ie what about what Labour did 20 years ago? IMHO this approach is purposeless. Is Blunkett an important and influential figure any more?
            Second half= crystal ball again with the use of the word ‘will’. You’re not an all seeing political figure like Kim Jong Un you know -well not yet any way. Besides I don’t want the Progress wing to walk- they like everyone else should play their part in framing policy. Look what happened when the Gang of Four left – we were in opposition for 15 years. Unlike yourself I don’t know for certain that they won’t walk but I think that there is a possibility that they won’t.
            A little more humility Dave and a little less stridency and certainty perhaps?

          • ” ‘what aboutery’ ” & ” stridency and certainty” – your own record in those areas is far from exemplary.
            But at least you decided not to give your tedious “Who are you Mystic Meg’s less successful twin brother?” line another outing.

          • AlanGiles

            Dave you echo my concerns: for example, the best and clearest way to beat rogue private landlords is to build council houses (Brown you remember promised a “massive” council house building scheme in June 2007 which came to naught, on his coronation day). Miliband is too timid to suggest this, even though this might well provide many of those “guaranteed” jobs he and his pals keep wittering on about.

            According to Harriet Harman on Any Questions this weekend she was “passionate” about the welfare debate this past week and about “demonising” the unemployed. What a shame she wasn’t so passionate when Purnell and Byrne were doing EXACTLY the same thing, encouraging the tabloids with their bile, and Blears claimed to have interviewed an entire family out of work (watching TV,, of course)and in their night attire at midday when she just happened to be “canvassing” (reminder to self: did she claim expenses for the use of shoe leather that day?). I often wonder if that incident was any more genuine than her expense claims. I wonder if Harman was passionate about ATOS signing off terminally ill people who subsequently died on JSA?. If she was, she didn’t say so, because like so many of her compassionate PLP friends she seems to have forgotten it was LABOUR who bought in the Freud reforms, and they used exactly the same rhetoric as Duncan-Smith and co when they were supporting little Jimmy Purnell. Perhaps she lost her voice in 2009: the longest case of laringytus in history.

            Labour have seen the light on welfare and yet crypto Tory Byrne remains as shadow at DWP? – like Dracula in charge of a blood bank. It doesn’t ring true.

            Miliband can keep mithering on about “change” and “one nation” but actions speak louder than words, and even in opposition you can do things (put the right people in the right jobs and remove the underperformers altogether), but you get the feeling with Miliband it will always be nothing but words, and words composed of single line sentences, like a child writing it’s first school essay. The more I hear of him and see his auto-cue friendly speeches, the more he reminds me of “Captain Fearless” – Kenneth Williams character in “Carry On Jack” (1962)

            Now I await the persons who voted you down, all three of them to do the same thing to me.Those three confirm T.S. Eliot’s maxim “humankind cannot bear too much reality”. Those three and those who “think” like them are awaiting the new play by Dame Magaret Beckett, “Waiting For Crudas”. Crudas will take them to the promised land. he might even be able to teach Miliband to string a few longer sentences together.

            Labour is very lucky to have subervient believers like “aracataca” who will dance to the party tune regardless: if “the party” says it’s true it must be true, indeed it has to be “abundantly” clear, and the rest of us are liars or fools for not swallowing it. I would not be so gullable, and most of us who have followed the word juggling of politicians of all parties for the past several decades are not. A Miliband Labour government will not be much different from a Blair or Brown government, because many of the old lags from those adminstrations are still doing time in the party. They continue to accept the coalition’s outpourings, never offer genuine alternatives, and just suggest some tame variations or “reforms” that they promise, but may never deliver, like Blair promising to renationalise the railway system in 1996 and 1997.

            After the “lets stick a label on it saying made in Britain” Miliband “solution” to the problems of manufacturing in the UK in Jan 2012, (Radio 4 interview on the World At One about this time last year) I am afraid I find him less convincing each time I hear him. He reminds me of what he is, a pretty poor, though clever, wordsmith who in truth has no more idea how to solve the very serious problems Britain has than Clegg or Cameron has.
            There is less to him than meets the eye.

            As for aracataca and his hypocritical plea for “less stridency and certainty”, what a pity he doesn’t follow his own advice when he calls people “semi-literate”

            Mention of “aracataca” reminds me of a certain work of George Orwell:

            “How many fingers am I holding up, Winston?”

            – “Four”

            “But if the party says there are not four, but five, then how many?”

          • Ah well, politicians get the votes they deserve – the question now is not which party can win the most votes but which can lose the least.

            At a time of falling support for Tories, when Labour’s mayoral candidate in Bristol is unable to win in an area containing two of Labour’s ‘must win’ 2015 seats, and Labour’s Sarah Parachute of Rotherham achieved a vote of less than 10,000 (the lowest since 1918 in that heartland constituency), then it does seem that Labour is going to need more than the blind faith of a diminishing number of enthusiasts if it is going to win in 2015.

            The main issue is one of trust. My trust in (and membership of) Labour was most recently destroyed by Burnham’s “it’ll help the third world” defence of his for-profit NHS Global initiative – Burnham’s boutique clinic in Dubai*, U.A.E. (a country with a higher GDP per capita than the U.K.) will help only the medical tourism/insurance industry and those rich enough to pay.

            * http://www.intmedtourism.com/en/companies/moorfields-eye-hospital-dubai-united-arab-emirates/

          • AlanGiles

            ” the question now is not which party can win the most votes but which can lose the least.”

            There you have it, Dave. I don’t think that it is a case that Miliband has suddenly become an intellectual giant, or that anyone seriously believes Jon Crudas is going to come out with any great thoughts (it will be the old ones carefully craftily repackaged so as to keep the Labour Left and Progressites on side), it is merely that, compared to the Clegg/Cameron attempt to be the new Laurel and Hardy they just look (slightly) less inept.

            Because of the structure of modern politics, with the lack of real life experience in the real world, but “doing” politics from childhood, all it means is that one bunch of asses will be replaced with another. Regardless of which party/parties make it in 2015 I can see no difference to long term problems.

          • Tokyo Nambu

            “it does seem that Labour is going to need more than the blind faith of a diminishing number of enthusiasts if it is going to win in 2015.”

            The most toxic problem is immigration. Miliband says we can talk about it now, but has nothing to say, and gives the impression that you’re allowed to talk about it but the answer from Labour will remain the same. The May 2015 election will be against the backdrop of unrestricted immigration from Romania; that is manna from heaven for the Tories. Prospective voters whose children can’t get a place in primary schools (because Labour allowed in large numbers of young immigrant families without allowing for the increase in birthrate that implies) aren’t going to be happy.

          • aracataca

            I would not be so gullable, – you might be if you could spell it correctly.

    • Gabrielle

      What I stand for is as clear as mud

      Maybe it’s just you, AG. Personally I found Miliband’s message, and what he stands for, crystal clear to understand. He is proposing that we reclaim our power from the 1%.

      The super rich, Dave’s kitchen supper or country supper friends, are the only people profiting from this government that blames the victims. However, Miliband identifies this ‘divide and rule’ tactic and wants to build a united, not divided, Britain. It is an aim that is decidedly left wing,

      But perhaps you really don’t want Labour to succeed – you’d rather stick with a Tory government. Why would that be? Is it because you realise that the reason the Tories maintained their power in the 80s and 90s was because the left were always fighting amongst themselves?

      The Tories believed that Labour were going to self-destruct with internal conflict after the 2010 General Election. The right use dissent within the left for their own means. Why play along with that – it’s a mug’s game, don’t you think?

      Miliband has played a blinder in uniting his party, against all expectations. Anyone who truly wants to see the back of this cruel and incompetent government would be using their energies better in getting behind a force for good, the Labour party, rather than just carping and letting the real evil flourish.

  • There are cases where letting agent fees are high.
    I feel Ed Milliband has only a single sided view of the private rental sector. I feel let down by Labour, they introduced the LHA system, which meant housing benefit was paid to the tenant. Landlord are out of pockets, sometimes to the tune of thousands. Labour should be thanking Landlords, for not evicting tenant on Housing Benefit, as the rent we get them is below market rent. Over the next few years, HB is capped at 1% over the next year, which is below inflation.

  • “Stopping families being ripped off by letting agents.”

    Fair enough. Ed Milliband should look at the eye watering fees charged by Local Council for issuing property Licences (e.g. HMO). Landlord have been ripped off (which in turn pushes up rents). A Licensse can cost anyewhere from £150 to £3000, depending on the local authority.

  • “So we will introduce a national register of landlords, to give greater powers for local authorities to root out and strike off rogue landlords.”
    Local Authorties already have power to deal with rogue Landlords.
    How about playing fair and support landlord who are victim of bad tenants? What is Labour going to offer?

  • Pingback: Mica male Cameron | Francesco Costa | Il Post()

x

LabourList Daily Email

Everything Labour. Every weekday morning

Share with your friends










Submit