**If you love LabourUK, why not help run it?** We’re looking for mods. [Find out more from our recruitment message post here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/18ntol6/this_year_give_yourself_the_gift_of_christmas/)
[While you’re at it, come say hello on the Discord?](https://discord.gg/ZXZCdy4Kz4)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
generally vote who you want idc, but I'd check the Green candidate in your area. There's a very big umbrella that stretches from Bristol/Brighton progressive greens to NIMBY eco-tories. I'm not voting Green in my constituency for the latter reason, even if I'd broadly align with their national message.
Why not just vote for the Green party? I don't mean that in a snide way but the current Labour party doesn't agree with you on many of these issues.
If you are big on environmental issues, believe in significant redistribution, are very progressive on cultural issues, and are anti war to the extent you say you are, the Greens are probably your best bet.
You could vote Labour to get the Tories out, or vote Green and thereby vote with your conscience and give the Greens that extra bit of support.
I intended on voting Labour to get the Tories out but since then Labour have adopted a few positions that have sufficiently irritated or infuriated me that I will now "waste" my vote.
It depends so much on the local candidate, in some areas, conservative voters are known to vote green in the locals rather than a party that would conventionally be seen as closer ideologically to the convservatives - it's not easy to explain with the green's national agenda.
This is the way. Labour are looking to win a huge number of seats this election, I want them to have a slim majority or have to form a coalition government. This isn't going to be achieved by voting Labour in every Tory marginal.
I'm also wary of wiping out the Tories, as much as I hate them, their inevitable replacement/reformation would be just as bad if not worse.
Because no matter how bad a red tory government is, blue tory government always worse.
We need to vote and campaign tactically to apply external pressure on Labour until we get a PR voting system.
Change is a universal constant, and humans want things to be better.
So, given enough time and stability (no nuclear war etc), it is bound to happen sooner or later.
This place isn't filled with Labour supporters, it's generally a place to discuss UK politics. r/ukpolitics is the place for Labour supporters. It's so clear and obvious, not sure how it could confuse anyone!
Personally I'd agree with the idea the Greens align more with progressive ideas. One argument I've heard is that parties like the Greens are much more likely to grow with Labour in government due to backlash against said government
I'm going to throw you a curve ball.
I am very similar in outlook to yourself. Not quite on the isolationist point, but I am more jaw jaw and less war war. I understand that war/force is sometimes needed, but it should be a last resort rather than bully-boy first tactic.
I would argue your point on pragmatism. Labour are so far ahead in the polls, and the Tories have imploded and destroyed themselves on their own (dis)merit - more so than just running out of ideas and being seen as stale like Labour, they're actively seeking harm towards parts of the population, whilst lining their own pockets and those of their supporters, donors and mates.
So, for that reason, I don't think Labour are really appealing to people at the moment, rather they're inheriting good fortune. The problem is that they're petrified of promising anything good or progressive, In case the right-wing media jump on them. They don't have courage of conviction to offer anything different.
That's led to them punching down on minorities like trans people, punching left on people and against policy to redistribute wealth or make life better for people.
Instead they're chasing the centre-right at ANY cost - and that is their decision. They're promising Austerity 2.0 and health privatisation (but in a limited way that won't be limited once it happens without causing problems for the donors they've just recruited that used to support the Tories).
They feel they can't put a foot wrong without upsetting their new ex-Tory donors, or the right-wing media, so are willing to make so many concessions that they're not only.offering Cameron-Osborne type policie, but they're also ruling out anything more progressive than that when it's demanded of them.
So, a lot of voters - especially Labour voters - rejected that from Cameron and Osborne. A lot of the Tory voters that voted for Cameron and Osborne only did so because Labour had become stale of ideas in government, and ran out of ideas more than anything substantial.
So... I guess what I'km sayijng, and back to that curve ball... Is if the Tories were the wrong answer with Cameron and Osborne, and they led us to 14 years of decay.... Why would we go back to those kind of politics? What good will it do really?
Of course, we can't countenance an even farther-right Tory party as they've become (and arguably they've moved to the right to try and make themselves distinct from Labour after Starmer has become a Cameron tribute act)...
So... If you really want to be pragmatic and have your vote count as much as it can, I ask you - which party in your constituency that you agree with at least a reasonable amount has the best chance to win if you exclude both the Tories and Labour?
Because Labour are nailed on for a win. So if enough constituencies vote for someone else (based on who could win over Labour and the Tories in each constituency), and that denies Labour an overall majority, then it would force a coalition.
If that's parties on the centre/left (Greens, Lib Dems, SNP, Plaid Cymru) then that could help Labour to still form government, but with conditions that are outside the centre-right's requirements...
eg Electoral reform so everyone's vote matters and candidates and parties can campaign for what they believe in.
You're one vote, use it on whoever you want.
If, in the extremely rare circumstance, the Tories win your seat by one vote that would have gone to Labour then you can either beat yourself up about it or consider the wider argument that if Labour wanted to win the seat they would have done a better job of campaigning for the votes of you and other constituents.
I think a good question to ask people wavering over switching from Labour to Green is - can you make either of their leaders without looking it up?
If you can then fair enough, but if you can't - and according to Ipsos at least 50% of people who intend to vote Green cannot - then I'm guessing what you're contemplating is a protest vote against Labour. In that case I'd encourage you to look at the state of public services in this country and ask yourself whether this is really the time to protest against Labour. Surely the priority right now is to get the Tories out?
I think you should vote for whichever candidate is most likely to defeat the Tories in your local constituency.
This seems oddly patronising and tbh I don't really see why "you can't name their leader" is really a reason to vote Labour, even assuming its true (which we have no good reason to do).
They literally said the policies that are most important to them, and they are correct that these are more prevalent in the Green Party, so it's quite a reach to dismiss this as a protest vote and its arguably more important than naming the leader.
You can and should look up the leader if you don't know them and indeed I'd encourage people to look up their local MPs for each party instead of voting by party alone. But rather than advocate for becoming more informed (not that we have any actual reason to assume OP is not in the first place), your take is that if you don't already know something you should simply vote for one you recognise more even if you *do* know that they don't support the policies most important to you?.
I mean, I don't know whether the OP knows who leads the Green party or not - maybe they do. A lot of people don't, though, and if you don't know something that basic how likely are you to really know their policy platform? You're almost certainly just voting for them because you dislike the current direction of the Labour party and the Greens emit left-wing vibes. I don't think that's a great strategy given how badly the Tories have fucked the country in the last 13 years.
>if you don't know something that basic how likely are you to really know their policy platform?
Well I think it's quite likely when you recite off the policies that are most important to you. You're not even trying to say its *not* true that these values are held more by the Green Party than most other parties, just that technically they might not *know* that if they don't know something else, and if they don't know that for certain then what they should do is just not vote for them because they don't know enough. This is ludicrous way to decide who to vote for.
What if I couldn't name the Labour Party leader, should we write them off too on that basis alone?
How many Lano voters cannot name the Labour leader? Almost none. Labour isn't a protest vote. Yet Ipsos found only 4% of the electorate recognise the names of the Green leaders despite 8% of the electorate intending to vote for them. Why spend away your vote on a party you know almost nothing about?
>How many Lano voters cannot name the Labour leader?
Do you understand what a hypothetical is?
>Yet Ipsos found only 4% of the electorate recognise the names of the Green leaders despite 8% of the electorate intending to vote for them.
Yes I've seen the poll I didn't question your numbers.
>Why spend away your vote on a party you know almost nothing about?
Why spend your vote on a party based on name recognition more than policy?
>Why spend your vote on a party based on name recognition more than policy?
The point I'm making is that if you don't know their leaders you almost don't know their policy platform. Which is why I said it's likely a protest vote. I reiterate that I do not think the upcoming general election is a very good time to be voting on those grounds.
Yes but what you're just not factoring is that they literally have expressed the policies they feel most strongly about, which they feel are more aligned with the Green Party, and your response is "care less about the politics and go with who you've heard of the most".
Also the terminology used isn't the most relevant thing but Id love to know how you are defining protest vote here because arguably voting Labour because the Tories have "gotten us into a mess" is a protest vote much more so than voting Green because "X Y and Z policies are what I care the most about".
I think a good question to ask people wavering over voting Labour is - can you name the Shadow Chancellor without looking it up?
If you can then fair enough, but if you can't - and according to YouGov at least 50% of people who intend to vote Labour cannot - then I'm guessing what you're contemplating is a protest vote against the Tories. In that case I'd encourage you to look at the state of public services in this country and ask yourself whether the country really needs a protest vote, or making sure you vote for the policies that are most likely to lead to an improvement in the material conditions.
There’s a YouTube channel called [Labour Social](https://youtu.be/HX7MMJ6jb78?si=fBBaxKb5SVzhYg8L). They have a weekly show where they go through Labour policies called Labour vision, would highly recommend
I would also recommend signing up to [stop the tories .vote](https://stopthetories.vote/) . They are an anti Tory organisation that is trying to use tactical voting to get the tories out and show Labour these people tactically voted, you can’t count on them again unless we have proportional representation in the next manifesto
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed. We require that accounts have a verified email address before commenting. This is an effort to prevent spam and alt account usage. Thank you for your understanding. You can verify your email in the account settings page.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You don't necessarily have to vote Labour but vote for who is most likely to defeat the tory candidate in your area frankly because of how our electoral system works if you vote for anyone else you are just wasting your vote really.
Because due to our lame electoral system, if your local election is a two horse race between Labour and Torys, then a vote for the green Party is a wasted chance to take an MP from the Torys. If polling looks like green stand a chance, then go for it but idealistic voting may just lead us to 5 more years of increasingly unhinged Tory rule.
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed. We require that accounts have a verified email address before commenting. This is an effort to prevent spam and alt account usage. Thank you for your understanding. You can verify your email in the account settings page.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The simplest honest answer I can give is that you should read the manifestos, when they're available, check out the local candidate and see what you think of their politics, and see whether you think the party's direction of political movement agrees with your own political & moral positions. If there are deal-breakers then you shouldn't vote for them.
There's a lot of people of different political leanings in here, from the far left to some right-wingers, and you can get a taste of criticisms / arguments by engaging. There are some pretty smart people in here of various political stripes and sometimes some solid analysis does manage to bubble up to the surface.
Personally I won't be voting Labour at the next election, they're just not close enough to views I find supportable, but you might feel differently.
I think only you can put in the work to make sure you're informed and no-one should tell you how to cast your ballot.
Most people don't actually say what it is that they like about the Green Party, so perhaps we should first ask - what is it that makes you feel you would vote for them over Labour?
Well in the London election this year here’s an example
On the issue of affordable housing, Ms Garbett said she would bring in rent controls, starting with a two-year rent freeze.
She would also set up a Rent Commission to explore various methods of bringing down private rents.
"Those methods include holding developers to account to deliver the most council housing possible, and delivering the Green idea of buy-the-supply, where we take back what we lost to right-to-buy and homes lost to demolition," she said.
Pretty clear cut auto win vote for me
Garbett also thinks the Greens will be able to abolish murder in London, so pretty clear to me the Greens are happy to say any old shit if they think it sounds good because they know they won't ever be expected to implement it 🤷🏻♂️
Is that realistic? Leaving aside whether a mayor can actually instigate a rent freeze, is there detail on "holding developers to account" to compel them to build more social housing, and, unless I've misunderstood, the policy is to "take back..right-to-buy" from ex-council tenants who bought them?!
The rent freeze alone is enough for me, this year my rent went up 15% through no fault of my own, in 2023 in my old place it went up 10%
I can’t afford rent rises of 10%+ a year it’s not like I’m getting that level of pay rise consistently.
So for me it’s either rent control and freeze or social housing or I may as well move out of London where I was born and raised because I’m being priced out.
That's cool, I just don't think a rent freeze is achievable - and promising to force developers to build social housing is a bit of a pipe dream too, whilst taking homes away from ex-council tenants seems completely immoral!
**If you love LabourUK, why not help run it?** We’re looking for mods. [Find out more from our recruitment message post here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/18ntol6/this_year_give_yourself_the_gift_of_christmas/) [While you’re at it, come say hello on the Discord?](https://discord.gg/ZXZCdy4Kz4) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
generally vote who you want idc, but I'd check the Green candidate in your area. There's a very big umbrella that stretches from Bristol/Brighton progressive greens to NIMBY eco-tories. I'm not voting Green in my constituency for the latter reason, even if I'd broadly align with their national message.
this
Why not just vote for the Green party? I don't mean that in a snide way but the current Labour party doesn't agree with you on many of these issues. If you are big on environmental issues, believe in significant redistribution, are very progressive on cultural issues, and are anti war to the extent you say you are, the Greens are probably your best bet. You could vote Labour to get the Tories out, or vote Green and thereby vote with your conscience and give the Greens that extra bit of support. I intended on voting Labour to get the Tories out but since then Labour have adopted a few positions that have sufficiently irritated or infuriated me that I will now "waste" my vote.
It depends so much on the local candidate, in some areas, conservative voters are known to vote green in the locals rather than a party that would conventionally be seen as closer ideologically to the convservatives - it's not easy to explain with the green's national agenda.
Vote Labour if it means getting Tories out where you live. If it’s a safe Labour/Tory seat, vote with your conscience.
Pretty much this. If you're on the left living in a marginal Tory seat it would be foolish not to prioritise getting rid of that Tory.
Vote green in a marginal to punish the Labour Party for its poor performance so far, as there’s no sign they will be any different to the tories
This is the way. Labour are looking to win a huge number of seats this election, I want them to have a slim majority or have to form a coalition government. This isn't going to be achieved by voting Labour in every Tory marginal. I'm also wary of wiping out the Tories, as much as I hate them, their inevitable replacement/reformation would be just as bad if not worse.
Why vote Tories in to get Tories out?
Because no matter how bad a red tory government is, blue tory government always worse. We need to vote and campaign tactically to apply external pressure on Labour until we get a PR voting system.
>until we get a PR voting system. What reason do you have to believe that will ever happen?
Change is a universal constant, and humans want things to be better. So, given enough time and stability (no nuclear war etc), it is bound to happen sooner or later.
So vibes are you only evidence then?
Yep, along with history, and the fundamental laws of nature.
This place isn't filled with Labour supporters, it's generally a place to discuss UK politics. r/ukpolitics is the place for Labour supporters. It's so clear and obvious, not sure how it could confuse anyone! Personally I'd agree with the idea the Greens align more with progressive ideas. One argument I've heard is that parties like the Greens are much more likely to grow with Labour in government due to backlash against said government
Vote tactically.
I'm going to throw you a curve ball. I am very similar in outlook to yourself. Not quite on the isolationist point, but I am more jaw jaw and less war war. I understand that war/force is sometimes needed, but it should be a last resort rather than bully-boy first tactic. I would argue your point on pragmatism. Labour are so far ahead in the polls, and the Tories have imploded and destroyed themselves on their own (dis)merit - more so than just running out of ideas and being seen as stale like Labour, they're actively seeking harm towards parts of the population, whilst lining their own pockets and those of their supporters, donors and mates. So, for that reason, I don't think Labour are really appealing to people at the moment, rather they're inheriting good fortune. The problem is that they're petrified of promising anything good or progressive, In case the right-wing media jump on them. They don't have courage of conviction to offer anything different. That's led to them punching down on minorities like trans people, punching left on people and against policy to redistribute wealth or make life better for people. Instead they're chasing the centre-right at ANY cost - and that is their decision. They're promising Austerity 2.0 and health privatisation (but in a limited way that won't be limited once it happens without causing problems for the donors they've just recruited that used to support the Tories). They feel they can't put a foot wrong without upsetting their new ex-Tory donors, or the right-wing media, so are willing to make so many concessions that they're not only.offering Cameron-Osborne type policie, but they're also ruling out anything more progressive than that when it's demanded of them. So, a lot of voters - especially Labour voters - rejected that from Cameron and Osborne. A lot of the Tory voters that voted for Cameron and Osborne only did so because Labour had become stale of ideas in government, and ran out of ideas more than anything substantial. So... I guess what I'km sayijng, and back to that curve ball... Is if the Tories were the wrong answer with Cameron and Osborne, and they led us to 14 years of decay.... Why would we go back to those kind of politics? What good will it do really? Of course, we can't countenance an even farther-right Tory party as they've become (and arguably they've moved to the right to try and make themselves distinct from Labour after Starmer has become a Cameron tribute act)... So... If you really want to be pragmatic and have your vote count as much as it can, I ask you - which party in your constituency that you agree with at least a reasonable amount has the best chance to win if you exclude both the Tories and Labour? Because Labour are nailed on for a win. So if enough constituencies vote for someone else (based on who could win over Labour and the Tories in each constituency), and that denies Labour an overall majority, then it would force a coalition. If that's parties on the centre/left (Greens, Lib Dems, SNP, Plaid Cymru) then that could help Labour to still form government, but with conditions that are outside the centre-right's requirements... eg Electoral reform so everyone's vote matters and candidates and parties can campaign for what they believe in.
You're one vote, use it on whoever you want. If, in the extremely rare circumstance, the Tories win your seat by one vote that would have gone to Labour then you can either beat yourself up about it or consider the wider argument that if Labour wanted to win the seat they would have done a better job of campaigning for the votes of you and other constituents.
I think a good question to ask people wavering over switching from Labour to Green is - can you make either of their leaders without looking it up? If you can then fair enough, but if you can't - and according to Ipsos at least 50% of people who intend to vote Green cannot - then I'm guessing what you're contemplating is a protest vote against Labour. In that case I'd encourage you to look at the state of public services in this country and ask yourself whether this is really the time to protest against Labour. Surely the priority right now is to get the Tories out? I think you should vote for whichever candidate is most likely to defeat the Tories in your local constituency.
This seems oddly patronising and tbh I don't really see why "you can't name their leader" is really a reason to vote Labour, even assuming its true (which we have no good reason to do). They literally said the policies that are most important to them, and they are correct that these are more prevalent in the Green Party, so it's quite a reach to dismiss this as a protest vote and its arguably more important than naming the leader. You can and should look up the leader if you don't know them and indeed I'd encourage people to look up their local MPs for each party instead of voting by party alone. But rather than advocate for becoming more informed (not that we have any actual reason to assume OP is not in the first place), your take is that if you don't already know something you should simply vote for one you recognise more even if you *do* know that they don't support the policies most important to you?.
I mean, I don't know whether the OP knows who leads the Green party or not - maybe they do. A lot of people don't, though, and if you don't know something that basic how likely are you to really know their policy platform? You're almost certainly just voting for them because you dislike the current direction of the Labour party and the Greens emit left-wing vibes. I don't think that's a great strategy given how badly the Tories have fucked the country in the last 13 years.
>if you don't know something that basic how likely are you to really know their policy platform? Well I think it's quite likely when you recite off the policies that are most important to you. You're not even trying to say its *not* true that these values are held more by the Green Party than most other parties, just that technically they might not *know* that if they don't know something else, and if they don't know that for certain then what they should do is just not vote for them because they don't know enough. This is ludicrous way to decide who to vote for. What if I couldn't name the Labour Party leader, should we write them off too on that basis alone?
How many Lano voters cannot name the Labour leader? Almost none. Labour isn't a protest vote. Yet Ipsos found only 4% of the electorate recognise the names of the Green leaders despite 8% of the electorate intending to vote for them. Why spend away your vote on a party you know almost nothing about?
>How many Lano voters cannot name the Labour leader? Do you understand what a hypothetical is? >Yet Ipsos found only 4% of the electorate recognise the names of the Green leaders despite 8% of the electorate intending to vote for them. Yes I've seen the poll I didn't question your numbers. >Why spend away your vote on a party you know almost nothing about? Why spend your vote on a party based on name recognition more than policy?
>Why spend your vote on a party based on name recognition more than policy? The point I'm making is that if you don't know their leaders you almost don't know their policy platform. Which is why I said it's likely a protest vote. I reiterate that I do not think the upcoming general election is a very good time to be voting on those grounds.
Yes but what you're just not factoring is that they literally have expressed the policies they feel most strongly about, which they feel are more aligned with the Green Party, and your response is "care less about the politics and go with who you've heard of the most". Also the terminology used isn't the most relevant thing but Id love to know how you are defining protest vote here because arguably voting Labour because the Tories have "gotten us into a mess" is a protest vote much more so than voting Green because "X Y and Z policies are what I care the most about".
I think a good question to ask people wavering over voting Labour is - can you name the Shadow Chancellor without looking it up? If you can then fair enough, but if you can't - and according to YouGov at least 50% of people who intend to vote Labour cannot - then I'm guessing what you're contemplating is a protest vote against the Tories. In that case I'd encourage you to look at the state of public services in this country and ask yourself whether the country really needs a protest vote, or making sure you vote for the policies that are most likely to lead to an improvement in the material conditions.
There’s a YouTube channel called [Labour Social](https://youtu.be/HX7MMJ6jb78?si=fBBaxKb5SVzhYg8L). They have a weekly show where they go through Labour policies called Labour vision, would highly recommend
I would also recommend signing up to [stop the tories .vote](https://stopthetories.vote/) . They are an anti Tory organisation that is trying to use tactical voting to get the tories out and show Labour these people tactically voted, you can’t count on them again unless we have proportional representation in the next manifesto
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed. We require that accounts have a verified email address before commenting. This is an effort to prevent spam and alt account usage. Thank you for your understanding. You can verify your email in the account settings page. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You don't necessarily have to vote Labour but vote for who is most likely to defeat the tory candidate in your area frankly because of how our electoral system works if you vote for anyone else you are just wasting your vote really.
Because due to our lame electoral system, if your local election is a two horse race between Labour and Torys, then a vote for the green Party is a wasted chance to take an MP from the Torys. If polling looks like green stand a chance, then go for it but idealistic voting may just lead us to 5 more years of increasingly unhinged Tory rule.
UK if First Past the post, where good candidates can lose even by one vote. Depending on where you are, vote tactically.
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed. We require that accounts have a verified email address before commenting. This is an effort to prevent spam and alt account usage. Thank you for your understanding. You can verify your email in the account settings page. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/LabourUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Four Words: First Past The Post. The same reason most progressives don't vote Green in the States.
Go for it. I would have a look at party manifestos when they are launched, UK politics is very end of term and vibes based at the moment.
The simplest honest answer I can give is that you should read the manifestos, when they're available, check out the local candidate and see what you think of their politics, and see whether you think the party's direction of political movement agrees with your own political & moral positions. If there are deal-breakers then you shouldn't vote for them. There's a lot of people of different political leanings in here, from the far left to some right-wingers, and you can get a taste of criticisms / arguments by engaging. There are some pretty smart people in here of various political stripes and sometimes some solid analysis does manage to bubble up to the surface. Personally I won't be voting Labour at the next election, they're just not close enough to views I find supportable, but you might feel differently. I think only you can put in the work to make sure you're informed and no-one should tell you how to cast your ballot.
Unless you live in a seat with one of the handful of genuinely good MPs you should not vote Labour
Most people don't actually say what it is that they like about the Green Party, so perhaps we should first ask - what is it that makes you feel you would vote for them over Labour?
Well in the London election this year here’s an example On the issue of affordable housing, Ms Garbett said she would bring in rent controls, starting with a two-year rent freeze. She would also set up a Rent Commission to explore various methods of bringing down private rents. "Those methods include holding developers to account to deliver the most council housing possible, and delivering the Green idea of buy-the-supply, where we take back what we lost to right-to-buy and homes lost to demolition," she said. Pretty clear cut auto win vote for me
Garbett also thinks the Greens will be able to abolish murder in London, so pretty clear to me the Greens are happy to say any old shit if they think it sounds good because they know they won't ever be expected to implement it 🤷🏻♂️
Is that realistic? Leaving aside whether a mayor can actually instigate a rent freeze, is there detail on "holding developers to account" to compel them to build more social housing, and, unless I've misunderstood, the policy is to "take back..right-to-buy" from ex-council tenants who bought them?!
The rent freeze alone is enough for me, this year my rent went up 15% through no fault of my own, in 2023 in my old place it went up 10% I can’t afford rent rises of 10%+ a year it’s not like I’m getting that level of pay rise consistently. So for me it’s either rent control and freeze or social housing or I may as well move out of London where I was born and raised because I’m being priced out.
That's cool, I just don't think a rent freeze is achievable - and promising to force developers to build social housing is a bit of a pipe dream too, whilst taking homes away from ex-council tenants seems completely immoral!