Letters—Labour plans do not go far enough on housing

Letters

Socialist Worker readers share their thoughts on the failed assassination of Trump and more

Keir Starmer’s inadequate policy on housing will have people looking for answers. Labour promises more social and affordable homes, but without any additional money to build them.

Its policy is not based on any assessment of housing needs, such as quantifying the number of social and affordable homes required.

Apparently, to help people priced out of the housing market, we should simply help house building corporations to make bigger profits.

This is supercharged neoliberalism. In London, 65 percent of new-build homes should have been affordable in 2017-22. But in fact only 20 percent were.

In planning, Labour will change the rules so we cannot stop unaffordable or badly designed buildings via planning objections.

We must also scrap Right To Buy to stop the loss of council housing. Council housing is in crisis—3,280 high rise blocks still have life-critical fire safety defects.

A council tenant in a new flat in Haringey, north London, pays a painful £13,000 a year in rent and service charges. Yet Labour will not ban these unaffordable “affordable” rents.

Children and families will lose out, and the prospects of future generations will be blighted. We can look forward to more tenure segregation in new buildings, where tenants cannot use the same entrances or lifts as homeowners.

Twenty local authority landlords have asked the government for an immediate £644 million of funding and more in the longer term.

That’s all because their housing business plans are going into crisis. The real answer to Starmer’s lack of change is to organise in working class communities to demand more and better homes.

A first step in addressing the housing crisis is signing people up to the five-point plan produced by Homes for All and Defend Council Housing.

Paul Burnham

North London

---

Trump is no victim, he’s reaping what he sowed

The assassination attempt on Donald Trump may be the single act that hands him a second term as Unites States president. It is wrong to depict Trump as an innocent “victim”.

Trump encouraged and incited political violence and hate across the US in his first term. Violent extremists who once infested the margins of society were emboldened by the fact that an open racist was in the White House.

During Trump’s presidency in 2017, we saw the murder of the anti-racist Heather Heyer by a white supremacist in Charlottesville. In the wake of her murder Trump described the racists rallying there as “fine people”.

In August 2019 Patrick Crusius carried out a mass-shooting at a Walmart store in El Paso, Texas, murdering 20 people and injuring 26 others.

Crusius was a member of the so-called “alt-right” and a supporter of Trump. His presidency ended with the attempted coup in Washington on 6 January 2021. He reached out to violent racists such as the Proud Boys to help him retain office.

Trump has cultivated hate and incited violence as part of a political strategy throughout his career. He is reaping the hate he has sown.

Sasha Simic

East London

---

We can and should hold MPs to account

Jonathan Ashworth, Leicester South’s former MP, shared his frightened account of how he was chased, pitchforks and all, by constituents while campaigning with his family on election day.

He hid in a local vicarage to avoid being questioned by constituents. Local Palestine activists had suitably dubbed the former Labour MP “genocide Jon”.

The narrative that portrays Palestine protesters as masses of hateful individuals is such a false one.

In this sad story, Ashworth showed himself to be more concerned over being publicly humiliated than his inadequate response over the ongoing Israeli genocide.

It highlights why there was so much support for Independents, such as Shockat Adam who ousted him.

Joyce Cheza

Leicester

---

Don’t trust Royal Mail in hands of billionaire

As Daniel Kretinsky’s takeover of Royal Mail gathers pace, there are many questions being asked in workplaces. One seems to be very popular—“What will change with a new owner?”

Awful changes are already taking place due to CWU union leaders Dave Ward and Andy Furey’s “surrender agreement” with Royal Mail bosses.

A new billionaire boss is hardly going to rip it up and save the workforce now, is he? No, it’ll be even more wage squeezing, bonus looting and workload increasing on an already worn out workforce.

Add in the possibility of compulsory redundancies next year, and another dispute isn’t that far away in my view. So, I think the answer is that it doesn’t matter who is in charge of Royal Mail Group—the fight remains the same.

Gary Smith

Postal worker in Coventry

---

Organising is what can win

Reading Socialist Worker’s article on heat in workplaces (10 July), I say get organised at work. Don’t wait for bosses or union leaders who sit in their air conditioned offices. In 1975 to 1984 I was a shop steward in a hospital laundry.

We organised morning and afternoon tea breaks. We also got orange juice with ice when needed—paid for by the hospital. Workers united will never be defeated.

Mike Archer

Cornwall

---

Off with all their heads

The king’s speech serves as a grim reminder of the backwardness of politics in Britain. It promised stability and security for the richest in society, as per Labour’s new fiscal rules.

King Charles Windsor made shallow remarks about the “cost of living challenges” from atop his throne. Under a new government and king, we can expect to see the same crises of the system.

Let’s build a revolutionary movement strong enough to take their heads off.

Archie Duffin

Edinburgh

---

Beware Sir Kid Starver

The very fact that there was no proposal in the king’s speech to remove the two-child benefit limit should be a warning. This evil cut was introduced by the Tories in April 2017.

It means that families cannot claim universal or child tax credit for more than two children born after this date.

When Tony Blair was elected in 1997, the trade union leaders gave the Labour government a honeymoon period. Labour took a long time to implement any changes. And there’s a real danger that union leaders could repeat that grave mistake.

Sally Kincaid

Leeds