Ed Miliband will today commit Labour to tough action on those at the top and bottom who are not "showing responsibility" and "shirking their duty".
Ed Miliband will today commit Labour to tough action on those at the top and bottom who are not “showing responsibility” and “shirking their duty”.
In a speech this lunchtime, he will make clear his intention to change major planks of policy, on responsibility, high pay and welfare – committing Labour to acting to restore the link between high pay and what individuals are contributing to shareholders and the economy, through greater transparency and greater accountability.
He will say:
“For too many people at the last election, we were seen as the party that represented these two types of people. Those at the top and the bottom who were not showing responsibility and were shirking their duty to each other.
“From bankers who caused the global financial crisis to some of those on benefits who were abusing the system because they could work – but didn’t. Labour, a party founded by hard working people for hard working people, was seen by some – however unfairly – as the party of those ripping off our society.
“New Labour did a lot to change the fabric of the country. But it didn’t do enough to change the ethic of Britain. My party must change… We were intensely relaxed about what happened at the top. No more. We will be a party that supports the real boardroom accountability that rewards wealth creation not failure.
“It is said we cared too little about responsibility at the bottom of society. No more. We will be a party that rewards contribution, not worklessness.”
On that point, on welfare and responsibility at the bottom, he will add:
“So we need responsibility at the top of society, but we also need it at the bottom. Again, the principle should be one that rewards contribution. We are facing a challenge to the belief in our welfare state – founded on principles of solidarity and compassion, but now tarred with the brush of unfairness and irresponsibility. If we want to protect and improve the British welfare state, we must reform it so it genuinely embodies responsibility and contribution as much as need.
“One area where people’s sense of fairness is under threat is social housing. In Manchester, as well as helping the most vulnerable families and disabled people with housing, they prioritise households who are giving something back to their communities – making a contribution – for example, people who work for or run local voluntary organisations and those who are working.
“They also look to reward people who have been good tenants in the past and who have paid their rent on time and never been involved in any Anti Social Behaviour. The London Borough of Newham is looking at something similar – prioritising work when allocating social housing and for example helping first those who give something back by, say, fostering children in need
“In their words they are ‘finding ways to end the race to the bottom where improving your situation and finding work are punished by getting pushed down the waiting list for a quality home’; these approaches mean that rather than looking solely at need, priority is also given to those who contribute – who give something back. It’s fairer and it also encourages the kind of responsible behaviour which makes our communities stronger, makes them work.
“They are just examples, but they show the kind of change we need. We are looking at all these issues in our policy review, but this is a simple way of rewarding people who do the right thing and it’s something I’d like to see done right across the country.”
We will have further analysis of Mr Miliband’s speech and his pledges on high pay later.
30 Responses to “Miliband calls for social responsibility at the top and bottom”
Mason Dixon, Autistic
If I went over it yet again Mouse, you’d just pretend I said something else.
Anon E Mouse
Leon Wolfson – I agree that in the grand scheme of things it is indeed small beer. I also agree that the rules have an element of inflexibility and that the Nordic countries have a completely different ethos where benefits are concerned.
But I have to say I agree with Miliband on his wishes to prevent Labour being seen as the party of the work shy and feckless. Despite Labour supporters wishes, the facts Miliband discussed regarding the party being seen as supporting the bankers and big business and at the other end of the scales he’s right.
The grief I’ve had for stating that truth on this site you wouldn’t believe!
Despite the rhetoric about “British Jobs For British Workers” from Brown this government is repeating almost the same thing. I don’t know if it will work or not but something has to be tried.
That doesn’t mean that you should be kicked by the system but also fraud shouldn’t be tolerated either any more than companies should have to tolerate under performing staff.
What Miliband seems to have finally realised is that Blair was Labour’s most successful Prime minister because he appealed to Mondeo Man / Worcester Woman – whatever and with the party having virtually no seats electorally between London and the North of the country his choices are limited – he has to do something.
Personally if he is leader at the next election then the party is doomed irrespective of all these changes he proposes. For once he seems to be being a realist.
Regarding your situation I genuinely hope you are in work and don’t face the situation you describe because I do agree things are only going to get worse I think…
Anon E Mouse
Mason Dixon, Autistic – You are on the wrong thread on this site…
cim
That doesn’t mean that you should be kicked by the system but also fraud shouldn’t be tolerated either any more than companies should have to tolerate under performing staff.
Except that at the moment the attitude seems to be “better ten people who should get benefits don’t than one person who shouldn’t does”. To take your corporate analogy, it’s like a manager saying “Bob in Marketing isn’t pulling his weight. I should make the entire Marketing department redundant so he stops.”
The response is not proportionate to the size of the problem. Claiming that it needs to be even more disproportionate to recover electoral confidence suggests that something has gone seriously wrong somewhere.
Mason Dixon, Autistic
You’re a liar in every thread Mouse, so I’m not.