Labour MP Neil Coyle has accused the Green Party of hypocrisy over housing policy after reports revealed that both of its deputy leaders have links to the private rental sector despite the party backing the “effective abolition of private landlordism”.
Coyle, the MP for Bermondsey and Old Southwark, said:
“Greens mirroring Reform in the ‘do as I say not as I do’ political market. Again.”
His comments followed reporting that Green deputy leader Rachel Millward receives around £5,000 a year from letting rooms in the East Sussex home she owns with her husband. Government guidance treats people who take in lodgers as landlords for relevant legal purposes.
Millward revelation follows scrutiny of Mothin Ali
The disclosure comes shortly after fellow Green deputy leader Mothin Ali was reported to own two rental properties through his company, MA Holdings.
One property was bought in 2022 and another in 2025, with both subsequently let to tenants.
The revelations have attracted attention because Green Party members backed a housing motion in 2025 calling for the “effective abolition of private landlordism”, including proposals to phase out buy-to-let mortgages and substantially expand public and community ownership of rented homes.
Green Party defends deputy leaders
The Green Party has rejected suggestions that either deputy leader is acting hypocritically.
A party spokesperson said it was “proud and fully supportive” of Millward and Ali and argued that politicians can campaign to change a system even where they currently operate within it.
Millward is understood to regard the person renting rooms in her home as a lodger rather than a conventional tenant and reportedly charges below-market rent. Older Green housing policy had also supported taking in lodgers as a way of making better use of existing housing stock.
Questions over Green housing policy
The controversy has nevertheless reopened debate about the wording and practical implications of the Greens’ housing policy.
The 2025 motion described private landlordism as “extractive and exploitative” and called for a long-term transition away from the existing private rental model towards greater public and community ownership.
Critics have argued that the personal circumstances of senior Green figures sit awkwardly alongside that language, while supporters say there is no contradiction in advocating reform of a system while participating in it under existing rules.
Coyle targets credibility gap
For Coyle, the episode is fundamentally about political credibility.
His intervention seeks to draw a contrast between the Greens’ rhetoric on landlords and the circumstances of some of the party’s own senior figures.
The row is likely to keep attention on how the Greens would translate their commitment to ending private landlordism into workable housing policy — and how senior figures explain their own involvement in the rental market while campaigning for fundamental reform of it.
