Ed miliband

Miliband talks the language of cuts

Much of Ed Miliband’s Grand Confession on the economy is wearily familiar. I mean, we’ve known his take on the deficit for some time: that the drop in tax receipts from a crumbling financial sector was to blame, rather than Brown’s spending. And to have him argue that Labour should have made the economy less dependent on the City is just another way of saying exactly the same thing. But there is something new in there, too. Miliband is set to admit that Labour didn’t “talk the language of cuts” soon enough. Not that he’s saying Labour should have – or still should – cut deeper and faster, mind. It’s

A shock for Dave

Wow. Dave had a real wobble at the start of PMQs today. Ed Miliband stood up, looking as mild as a puppy, and asked about the ‘tip’ of two million quid recently paid to the boss of Lloyds. ‘In opposition,’ said Ed, ‘the prime minister promised, “where the tax-payer owns a large stake in a bank, no employee should earn a bonus of over £2,000”.  Could he update us on how he’s getting on with that policy?’ He was already seated when the first peals of laughter echoed around the chamber. Dave had stood up but he didn’t speak. Nothing came out. Silence seemed to have mastered him for a

An ill-tempered exchange

The first PMQs of the year was a bad tempered affair. The Prime Minister had clearly decided that attack was the best form of defence, hurling insult after insult across the despatch box. He accused Ed Miliband of being a ‘nothing man’, told him that his Shadow Chancellor can’t count and that he doesn’t count and mockingly brought up Miliband’s brother. But Cameron didn’t do anything to politically detoxify the bonus issue, which is going to carry on haunting this government, note that Lloyds — partly state owned — is going to award its boss a £2million pound bonus. Miliband also scored when he pointed out just how different Cameron’s

PMQs live blog | 12 January 2011

VERDICT: Woah. If you ever needed a PMQs to brush away the last morsels of festive cheer, then this was it. Every question and answer came laced with some sideswipe or other, and it made for a scrappy exchange between the two party leaders. Both struck blows against each other, but both were also guilty of errors and mis-steps. Miliband squandered an easy attack on bankers’ bonuses, even allowing Cameron to turn it back against Labour. While, for his part, the Prime Minister was so relentlessly personal that it came across as unstatesmanlike. I don’t think either one really emerged victorious, or well, to be honest. It was simply unedifiying

Illsley’s untenable position

After David Chaytor’s conviction last week, the dominoes just keep on tumbling. Today, it was Eric Illsley’s turn to confess to his expenses-related sins – and he did so by pleading guilty to three “false accounting” charges in Southwark Crown Court. Given that he’s still MP for Barnsley Central – although now as an independent, rather than the Labour MP he was elected as – that makes him the first sitting parliamentarian to face sentencing as a receipt offender. A dubious accolade, to be sure. In terms of day-to-day politics, the next question is whether Illsley will be able to hang on to his seat. He could, theoretically, remain in

Mixed attitudes towards the cuts

Forget the voting intentions, the real action in YouGov’s latest poll comes in the supplementary results. There, as Anthony Wells suggests, are attitudes towards spending cuts that will both perturb and hearten the coalition. Let’s take the bad stuff first: “Asked if the government’s cuts will be good or bad for the economy only 38% now think they will be good, compared to 47% who think they will be bad. In comparison between October and December last year it was roughly even between people thinking the cuts would be good and those thinking they would be bad. On whether the cuts are being done fairly or unfairly, 57% now think

Ed Miliband’s Tartan Roots

At some point it seems wise to suppose that Ed Miliband isn’t playing any devious or subtle long game and that, far from being baffling, his public pronouncements are probably a pretty reasonable guide to what he actually, truly believes. And he really doesn’t think that Labour made any significant errors while in office. Surpluses are for wimps; real men run deficits even in boom times. In this, as in so much else, Miliband rejects Tony Blair’s analysis and sides with his old mentor Gordon Brown. Fair enough. Iain Martin finds this perplexing, not least from any electoral/political perspective and he’s right. Miliband’s views are touchingly old-fashioned. So much so,

Johnson running out of his nine lives

Ed Miliband’s press conference today was a classic example of clever opposition politics. He and Alan Johnson said that Labour would continue the bonus tax on the banks for one more year. This policy has the twin advantage of maximising the coalition’s discomfort over the whole issue of bankers’ bonuses and expiring well before the next election. The rest of Miliband’s press conference was devoted to an attempt to defend the record of the previous Labour government. Miliband kept making the valid point that in the years before the crash Cameron and Osborne weren’t saying that Labour was spending too much but were instead committed to matching Labour’s spending plans.

Will Balls and Cooper capitalise from Johnson’s mistakes?

You’ve probably heard about Alan Johnson’s latest slip-up yesterday. But it’s still worth highlighting the response made by a Labour spokesman – as Dizzy has – because it’s simply extraordinary. Here it is: “We have a Shadow Chancellor who lives in the real world. He knows the difference between a progresive and regressive tax. He knows what it takes to get on in the real world. That is more important than taking part in a Westminster quiz game.” Extraordinary that Labour should already have to make excuses on behalf of Johnson. But even more extraordinary that they should be made in this manner. The shadow chancellor errs, in quick succession,

The pollsters have Labour running away with it in Oldham East

The same, but completely different. That’s the electoral paradox that emerges from a couple of opinion polls on the Oldham East & Saddleworth by-election this morning. The same, because both the Lord Ashcroft survey for the Sunday Telegraph and the ICM survey for the Mail on Sunday produce the same result as in the general election: Labour first, the Lib Dems second and the Tories in third. Completely different, because this is no longer the achingly close contest that it was back in May. Both polls have Labour soaring 17 percentage points above the yellow bird of liberty. Of course, the polls aren’t always right. Yet these latest will surely

Affable Cameron invites you into his home

Perhaps I’m alone in this, but David Cameron interviews better in print than he does on screen. He’s almost too polished on television. His supreme confidence and tendency to guffaw at his scripted jokes can grate. But in print his assurance has an affable, human quality. The Daily Mail has interviewed him today. Most of the piece is a lifestyle feature – Dave at home attending to Florence’s evening feed as he watches Newsnight. It is vacuous fare, but it strikes a brilliant contrast with Ed Miliband’s rout at the hands of the nation’s housewives on the Jeremy Vine Show, where there were echoes of Gordon Brown’s excruciating unease with

Miliband is not yet the man to build the ‘good society’

Neal Lawson¹s Comment is Free blog-post/essay/manifesto on the ‘good society‘ is causing a flurry of interest in Labour circles. The head of Labour leftish pressure group Compass has been banging on about this for four years now. Borrowed ultimately from Aristotle, this re-heated utopianism is a tempting route for post-socialists tired of the compromises of the Blair years. Neal Lawson is a passionate man, who can claim with some justification to have been developing Labour¹s version of the ‘big society’ for some time. Here is Neal at his emotional, tub-thumping best: ‘To take back some semblance of control, we can’t start from a position of trying to humanise a turbo-consumer

Balls strikes at delicate Clegg

Ed Balls has been biding his time on Control Orders, but now he has struck. Writing on his blog, he appealed for consensus on this ‘sensitive issue’. ‘I have told Theresa May that, wherever possible, I will support her over the counter-terrorism measures that must be taken in the national interest – and we will play our part in building a new consensus for the future… that’s what a responsible Opposition should do.’ Balls knows that May favours retaining Control Orders, so perhaps this is a subtle endorsement of her position against the Lib Dems. He continues, conceding that he does not possess the facts. (The Home Secretary, of course,

Unpicking Miliband’s deceits

Ed Miliband has penned a combative but incredible piece in today’s Times (£). He makes two substantial points. First, that the coalition is deceiving people: Labour was not to blame for the deficit. And second, the coalition’s cuts package (in its entirety) is unnecessary. Oh what a tangled web he’s weaved. His argument is a maze of conceits, sleights of hand and subterfuge, and he interchanges between debt and deficit at his convenience. But, occasionally, his position is exposed. As this Coffee House graph recalls, Labour built a substantial structural deficit prior to the economic collapse. Tony Blair acknowledged as much in his memoir: ‘We should also accept that from

All to play for in Oldham East

The Oldham East and Saddleworth by-election is fast shaping up to be the event that will set the tone for the first quarter of the political year. The unique circumstances in which the vote was called makes it particularly hard to predict, no one is quite sure whether there’ll be a backlash against Woolas or one against the Lib Dems for going to court to overturn the result. As I say in the magazine tomorrow, if the Lib Dems were to win, it would give Clegg the breathing space he so needs at the moment. Lib Dem worries about what the coalition is doing to them politically would subside, temporarily

Khan to Miliband: What life experience do you have?

Ok, not quite. But this snippet from GQ’s interview with Shadow Justice Secretary Sadiq Khan is almost a description of Ed Miliband’s rise to the Labour leadership: “One of my criticisms of a lot of politicians of all parties is that they’re career politicians. Since they were 11 years old they dreamed of being an MP, being the Prime Minister, and so they’ll do A-Level Politics, Politics degree, get a job with an MP, work for a think tank, become an MP, Prime Minister. And my criticism is what life experiences do you have? The reason most MPs aren’t popular is that people can see through that.” He makes up

Clegg and Cameron decouple

Cameron and Clegg are putting on a show for the in-laws. After mounting disquiet from the fringes of their respective parties, the two leaders are journeying to Oldham East to quash rumours of a merger and reaffirm that theirs is a marriage of necessity. David Cameron will travel north in due course. God knows what he will say? Presumably that he no longer wishes his partners well – get out there and biff ‘em, or words to that effect. On the other hand, Nick Clegg will declaim his lines today. His script is hyperbolic, replete with wishful fantasy about a ‘two-horse race between Labour and the Liberal Democrats’. Oldham is

The VAT argument bubbles along

Today has been one of predictable political sparring over the VAT increase. But, as one Tory MP said to me last night, the crucial question is how long people keep talking about it. If the public come to blame the VAT rise for every price rise they encounter—as Ed Miliband wants them to—then the coalition has a problem. But if the new VAT rise just becomes a fact of life then the coalition will pay a low political price for the rise. Indeed, if the VAT rise ends up helping provide money for an income tax cut later in the parliament then the coalition could actually benefit from it. (Note

The Tories turn their fire on ‘lamentable’ Johnson

Come back, you insufferable relatives, all is forgiven: the political class has devoted an afternoon to trading insults about who said what about VAT and when. However, there have been some intriguing exchanges amid the New Politics’ latest outing. First, Labour seems to be fighting the two coalition partners as a single entity in Oldham East. Cameron, Clegg and Simon Hughes have received equal measures of opprobrium this afternoon and all have been lumped together. This was always a danger, but, as Fraser noted, Clegg and Cameron invited the manoeuvre by uniting their parties’ central operations in the cause of government. If Cameron and Clegg don’t differentiate in the general,

There is no reason to raise VAT

It is very clear that the government cannot carry on borrowing at current rates and the coalition’s proposals for reducing government borrowing are prudent. However, today’s VAT rise is unnecessary. As has been said before, we did not get into this situation because the government taxes us too little. Ever since Gordon Brown abandoned his self-imposed restraint in 2000, government spending, financed mainly by stealth taxes and increased borrowing, has expanded rapidly to its current level of over 50 percent of national income. As such the whole of the balance of fiscal adjustment should come through spending cuts. The coalition’s spending reductions have reflected political expediency, not sound economics. The