91Èȱ¬

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Ed Miliband, David Miliband, Ed Balls & Yvette Cooper. Why am I suddenly reminded of the corrupted despots that made up China's Gang of Four during the bleakest years of the Cultural Revolution?

After being discouraged from running for the leadship twice by his brother only to see him take it for himself, David Miliband should quit frount line politics as this level of deviousness should not be repaid with support!

Is "I'm a union man" by the strawbs now the labour leaders anthem?

All this user's posts have been removed.Why?

Any opposition will target David Miliband to go on their side, with all sorts of promises, as they know that David will be Ed's achilles heel. Watch out David!

With tongue in cheek, I seem to remember it being mentioned that Deputy Leader and other Shadow Cabinet membership positions are up for election soon... I wonder if Miliband Major would settle for Deputy Leader (in the Clegg mould rather than a la Prescott)? With Miliband Minor and his partner reportedly expecting a baby, and presumably paternity leave in the offing, DM may get a good crack at being in charge, at least for a little while! Oh, what about Mum Miliband (Marion Kozak) for Party Chairman? Now that could really liven up the political scene! :-)

It all sounds like the same old crap.Same names,same faces being passed around from job to job with absolutely no qualifications or ability to do the job.Such vital positions in the future of this country seem to be passed around willy nilly.Why would anyone consider for one example the finances of this country in the hands of Ed Balls or even worse his missus?Its like making a Bank cleaner the chief executive of Barclays.I dont get it.Surely government would function much better if the top jobs went to people who actually know something about it rather than it going to the"you scratch my back ill scratch yours"brigade whos only concern is to get the nice jobs with all the power because they are ego-tystical maniacs.Bewildering and totally inept.

Now that I have had time to digest the result I still can't help but think that the party made the wrong choice. Whilst I have nothing personal against Ed I just dont think it will be an effective leader a great Lieutentant but not leader and now there is the prospect that David might quit British politics altogether - this should be prevented. A talent such as his needs to be used.

The Labour party is understandably in disarray because the key players are trying to distance themselves from the failures of the Blair / Brown era, whilst at the same time failing to face up to the fact that they themselves played a defining role in those failures.

It's all rather unedifying.

David Miliband may have had more support from Labour MPs, but the party's paymasters (the Unions) have the casting vote. For Red Ed to suggest he is his own man is extraordinary!

Poor David must be gutted ,thats what happens to Davids when they refuse to challenge Golieth [just in case they get their rocks off at the wrong time]who then later self destructs.

David identified with Golieth [calculating power ] and lost.

Surely David read the old testament but was a philistine at heart!.

Can't he politely ask Cathy Ashton to stand aside, thereby at least raising the importance of the post of High Representative For Foreign Affairs and Security Policy to the level it deserves?

I don't see any change - same old, same old
All over promoted. I am sick of looking at them.
They all had their hands in the till so to speak working for GB.

#4 by Mabelode: The song is called "Part of the Union" which might even be a better more apposite title - time will tell.

Don't Panic !

Man wins Labour leadership contest with OMOV union votes. Martial law declared. Don't forget to look under the bed...
If you're middle class go home and remain indoors.

Oh,and grow up...

Well I'm not impressed with Ed for leader, British politics is stuck in a rut and this is just about a myopic as it gets. Truly the UK now have the most mediocre politicians on the planet.

Maybe Ed will just be a caretaker leader (ala IDS) and towards the next election they'll think again and oust him and then DM or someone else will come in.

DM will be shadow chancellor...probably. And if so will hang old Gideon out to dry...

Interestingly, MPs voting for EM as first preference incude John Denham (who resigned over Iraq,)Hilary Benn, and Frank Field...quite a mixed bag really and certainly not all from the left of the party.

no.14: The song you mentioned; "Part of the Union", by that self-confessed right-wing group The Strawbs was, in fact, a dig at unions and their members. It was never a clarion call for union activity. I do hope the subtlety wasn't wasted on you at the time of it's release - or today.

Cant believe Ed could be so disloyal to his brother.David is far the better choice and should leave the front bench till his brother gets defeated.David you were the only votable one and now expect at least 8 years of the conservatives.

tacrepus you are ridiculous - how can you compare modern democratic politics to THE worst political regime ever!

How long before Cameron offers David a job as an EU commissioner? It would be exactly the personally gracious and politically astute type of move to be expected from a Tory gentleman.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

15 craigmarlpool

Don't Panic !

Man wins Labour leadership contest with OMOV union votes. Martial law declared. Don't forget to look under the bed...
If you're middle class go home and remain indoors.

Oh,and grow up...

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Regardless of Ed's political views, the manner of his election leaves him open to attack.

Man wins party leadership contest despite not being the preferred candidate of either the party's elected MPs or party members.

He was the preferred candidate of the trade unions who bankroll the party, but tells reporters that he is his "own man".

I'm sure David M will accept a job, once he has stopped sulking, it would look incredibly childish if he stormed off because his little brother beat him.

My question is it took 13 years for the Thatcherite MPs to fall into insignificance and a new generation of voters who do not remember the Thatcherite years for them to be able to squeeze into government How long will it take for the Blairites to fall into insignificance before we vote labour again we should remember Major had the makings of being a good PM if the Thatcherites had given him a chance Brown would have made a good PM if the Blairites had given him a chance MPs seem to be their own worst enemy with their back biting and bitchiness I cannot see the labour party swinging anymore to the left under Ed but more importantly I cannot see them swinging anymore to the right as they did under Blair and less so under Brown

One has to question NRs reporting of this story. Yesterday focusing on the role of union voters in EM's victory (sound bite stuff but hardly a real story), today inventing personal division between the brothers. There seems to be constant focus on non issues, gossip and speculation. A lament for the boring stories of the Blair Brown relationship.

Does anyone know what the actual break down of MPs and MEPs was for each of the candidates in the Labour leadership election?

I think that two things have been over-egged in the last 30 hours or so.
1. There is more about the Millibands that is the same than that which is different. And as Harriet Harman said today, there were many in the Labour party who were making up their minds as to which of the two brothers to vote for.
2. The voting in all three areas was pretty close and so you can't really say that one candidate was a runaway union favourite while the other dominated the membership and the MPs (and MEPs). It didn't happen like that.

I like the fact that both of them went to a London Comprehensive. They are not the same as Clegg and Cameron, i.e. the silver spoon brigade.

What is important is that this awful coalition has no opposition and is only beginning to cause absolute destruction. I hope that in the first instance we have a rallying point for showing up what Cameron is really about (i.e. right-wing tea-party like tactics of reducing governemnt and destroying the public sector eduction and NHS, while pretending to be Mr Nice Guy who wouldn't normally axe everything only he is only concerned about reducing a deficit). The deficit is only a smoke screen. LAst week the LibDems showed just how ineffective they are, as they are now all gagged and tied into policies which are totally the opposite to those that they were elected to presue.

In the second instance I hope that we can see emerging, an alternative government in waiting.

I hope that David Milliband will have a senior role in the Labour party and that the party can become united.

Maybe it's just me, but Ed seems like a lightweight figure and I just can't see him as a Prime Minister. I have been a floating voter in the last two elections, and I can't see myself being enthused by an EM-led Labour Party.

David along with his friend Mandi should now learn how to March in a Union protest, since most of the Country will be having un-told numbers of Marches before next Winter is over, and then he [ David ], might then begin to learn how the REAL Labour Voters have to struggle to live, for he could not expect to Win any majority of Votes until he learns the Ropes, First.

If however he cannot Stand United with the REAL Labour Party voters, then it would be better for ALL around if he quit Government altogether, for as much as Ed loves David the rest of us will have no trouble in saying Good-bye.

Nick, isnt this all fairly academic? Labour will be out of power for about a decade so what difference does it make who leads them into the wilderness?

13. At 8:01pm on 26 Sep 2010, Ava78 wrote:
I don't see any change - same old, same old
All over promoted. I am sick of looking at them.
They all had their hands in the till so to speak working for GB.


------------------------------------------------------------

GB said "All hands on deck " so the motley ambitious crew made their way to atiller to change direction .



After the ship had hit the iceland burg they pondered why GBs grin had moved from left to right but not the ship.


Its a mystery to this day !

@29 Jeremy Preece

Well said. Ed is no Redder than the rest of the New Labour family. People forget that Blair won the unions! Remember Cameron, who campaigned as a Europhobic Thatcherite, and then tacked to the centre as soon as he got the job!

The key issue is how quickly Ed defines himself and he will need to quickly distance himself from the unions and tack to the centre, which he has already done in one interview. But he also needs to show a credible alternative to what's on offer now.

The one unknown is how he will adapt to leadership. Hague and Menzies couldn't rise to the challenge - Blair and Cameron could. He'll also need to avoid any gaffes.

This was a great advert for adopting the AV system ;- If you come second, you win ! Much fairer.

Hi boldberry44

you wrote
"
"30. At 9:17pm on 26 Sep 2010, boldberry44 wrote:

Maybe it's just me, but Ed seems like a lightweight figure and I just can't see him as a Prime Minister. I have been a floating voter in the last two elections, and I can't see myself being enthused by an EM-led Labour Party."
------------------------------------

I am not sure that he is a lightweight figure. He certainly seems to be very young for a party leader and possible PM. Of course I don't know anything about you, but you may like me, you are suffering from that feeling that policemen and women are looking like children. That is when I realised that I not as young as I think. Therefore I wonder if your perception could in part be based on EM's age.

30. At 9:17pm on 26 Sep 2010, boldberry44 wrote:
Maybe it's just me, but Ed seems like a lightweight figure and I just can't see him as a Prime Minister. I have been a floating voter in the last two elections, and I can't see myself being enthused by an EM-led Labour Party.

--------------------------------------------------------------

What is Lightweight is when watching the Punch and Judy Show in the Coalition, namely: Cameron and his Butler Clegg in Action [ or rather the lack of ], whom between them profess to be standing Side by Side in the Middle-Ground of British Politics.

Since therefore, the Middle-Ground of UK Politics is already over-crowded with a forthcoming String of Cuts by a thousand Swords there is NO POINT in what so ever having another Blow-Hard in the form of David Miliband joining them.

Ed Miliband has every chance in defeating the arguements for the Cuts of the Center-Right Coalition by standing upon the Labour Parties Traditional Left of Center politics, since many that once believed themselves to be Middle Class have now woken-up and realised that they to also are in fact Working - Class, and under and during the next 5 Years of this Coalition Government Expendable.

DM was a wimp when GB needed a challenge, and has rightly lost the opportunity to lead, that he so desired.

Dear Tacrepus, I expect you're "reminded" of the Gang of Four because you wanted to be... I mean, they're not (as far as I know) especially corrupted, they're certainly not despots (don't you, er, have to have political power to qualify?), they don't seem to me to be a gang and you only get four by stretching them with that nice Yvette. Not exactly a comparison that leaps out at you, is it?

@34 Adrian B

I think we are on the same page Adrian. Yes Ed has won the leadership race, but his task has only just begun. I must say that as his first day comes to end the overall signs are pretty encouraging. Let's see how much he can define by the end of this conference.

I am sure that the stakes are even higher, as if he does a good job and focuses discontent with the ConDems into a constructive alternative he may well find some LibDem MPs looking for longer term security are wanting to talk to him. In other words if Ed does really well the ConDems may not actually run their full five years.

DM has no intention of leaving front line politics for no other reason that he has no experience of doing anything else.

This is a bit of worry as he, like his brother and so many others in his line of career are running the country without any qualification.

It's like giving your child the keys to a car and telling them to drive without a lesson.

God bless the Labour Party and all who fail in her!

PS Top Tip to DM: Go do an apprenticeship in banking, see what is going wrong and how it may best be reformed and then come back to front line politics and put theory and ideology into practise.

41. At 9:51pm on 26 Sep 2010, andfinally wrote:
DM has no intention of leaving front line politics for no other reason that he has no experience of doing anything else.

This is a bit of worry as he, like his brother and so many others in his line of career are running the country without any qualification.

------------------------------------------------------------

Its a good thing that not ALL Politicians and Party Leaders are NOT elected into Government just because they qualify by being Silver-Spoon fed, Multi-Millionaires.

29. Jeremy Preece wrote:

I like the fact that both of them went to a London Comprehensive. They are not the same as Clegg and Cameron, i.e. the silver spoon brigade.

=====

I know many from the 'silver spoon brigade' who saved themselves a fortune, sent their talented children to a Comprehensive School, and still ended up on top the heap.

It says more about the family set up than the educational system which is why you can manipulate society as much as you want; the cream still rises to the top.

Whichever system works - if it gets the best results, go with it but please, never go to the lowest common denominator because of class envy; it's not very edifying.

Labour are going to be in the wilderness for a few years now and even longer if the likes of Bob Crowe and Co from the loony left wing fringe are going to bring the unions out on strike against the cuts in public expenditure.
The public accept that cuts are coming, so if the cuts are managed to protect the disadvantaged the public wont support strikes if the coalition Government can show they are fair.
For too many years, we have been spending money we don't have and it has to be paid back.
The public know full well that it was Labour that was committing money to projects where we didn't have the money.
The unions will strike at their peril and any nonsensical strikes will hurt Labour and Ed.
I hope David will get over the rebuff. If he loves his brother as they keep telling us, he will be there to SUPPORT Ed. Not running away and sulking....

I have to say I find it bizarre to see all the comments suggesting that Labour will clearly be in the wilderness for a decade. For those who pay attention you will know that Labour have already made up the ground with the Conservatives in the polls. Of course the fight back needs to be sustained and I hope David joins his brother in leading it. Osbourne must be terrified at the thought of being up against David and Gove must be hoping for some reprieve from Balls. Labour are in a far stronger position than the tories were in 1997... Labour had a landslide in 1997, the Conservatives have a coalition on 2010.

Trouble is the press both paper and TV and Internet blogs like this will make it difficult for David. You will all, bang on when ever the poor chap appears or sneezes! David always had an edge that made him unsuitable for leader. Just leave his Brother Ed to do a proper job.

43. At 10:03pm on 26 Sep 2010, andfinally wrote:
29. Jeremy Preece wrote:

I like the fact that both of them went to a London Comprehensive. They are not the same as Clegg and Cameron, i.e. the silver spoon brigade.

=====

I know many from the 'silver spoon brigade' who saved themselves a fortune, sent their talented children to a Comprehensive School, and still ended up on top the heap.

It says more about the family set up than the educational system which is why you can manipulate society as much as you want; the cream still rises to the top.

Whichever system works - if it gets the best results, go with it but please, never go to the lowest common denominator because of class envy; it's not very edifying.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Tell that to the Rich Classes whom are Sacking those of a lesser Class, for it has nothing to do with any lowest common denominators, since Class breeds Power and Money Greed, and at the end of the Day it is all about Survival.

Hi "andfinally"

No I don't like the class envy thing and that is what I liked about New Labour in its heyday. However, you have to admit that there is someting wrong when a particular school produces all those who go to the top.

I would agree that it is not the eduction system so much as family values and support which determine whether children do well at school. That is why I feel that the present system of beating up on teachers because they can't overcome the family backgrounds of their pupils is downright unfair (that's a reference to OFSTED).

My point is that schools like Eton are by definition only there for the very rich, and are hot houses for the elite.
In real life there is a much bigger cross section of society, and those who do well in (say) business are those who can mix well, and work with people from all walks of life. I don't know of anyone who would claim that a place like Eton has a real cross section of society in its classrooms.
Therefore I stand by by original line that someone from a comprehensive school is better placved to be able to get on with a wide cross-section of society.

44. At 10:08pm on 26 Sep 2010, Andrew Lye wrote:
Labour are going to be in the wilderness for a few years now and even longer if the likes of Bob Crowe and Co from the loony left wing fringe are going to bring the unions out on strike against the cuts in public expenditure.
The public accept that cuts are coming, so if the cuts are managed to protect the disadvantaged the public wont support strikes if the coalition Government can show they are fair

-------------------------------------------------------------

Then are you suggesting that if the Public at Large do not find these pending Cuts to be fair, then you WILL support Strike Action to be taken?

Given the talk over the last few days, Labour now know what the opposition parties and papers will throw at Ed. The government also know what Labour will throw at them. The pain starts next year in terms of the impact of cuts and strike action. Personaly, I think the Olympics in 2012 could actually tip the balance - good will factor etc..

Nick why dont you give edd his day instead of trying to race ahead with davids agenda.
Others lost allso why dont you mention those people?
Or are you trying to keep ahead of the pack with what next Q,s.

no 45 Carol

Yes you have picked up on something that I was saying on another blog.
1. Labour lost an election but only just and the Tories failed to scrape a majority. in 1997 Labour had a majority of 177, and there were only I think, 153 Tory MPs. So the arithmatic for making a comeback is easier for Labour now thn it was for the Conservatives then.
2. When an election has been lost, the looser normally sinks further in the opinion polls for the first year. However Labour has gone from 29% to 37%, and this in youGov seems pretty consistant over the last few monmths.
3. Labour has reported an increase in membership.
4. Note that 2, and 3 were achieved without there being a Labour leader inplace. So with a new leader that growth should increase.

I think David will spend more time gardening and doing DIY. It would be a shame if all that stuff he bought were to go to waste.

There seems to be a great insanity overpowering all rational political debate at present. The Tory Liberal Coalition will destroy itself as a direct result of 'solving' the deficit in the public finances. Just as Labour lost the election by being lumbered as the incumbents who had to destroy the public finances to rescue the banks. This financial malaise has a very long way to run. (Everyone knows this fact of life - and this is why the Tory/Liberal coalition wants to force five year parliaments as a priority.)

We will be nowhere out of the depression within five years and this is well understood and feared by the political classes on all sides. The crisis could have a decade or even more to run. Ed and his advisers know this too. There comes the question as to wanting to win the next election, because of the continuing dire austerity and its consequences. I do still wonder if we will see a grand coalition of all parties within a few years, forced upon the Nation because of the inability of any party to tackle the economic imperatives.

The square that has to be circled is simple to state yet impossible to solve. Houses (and their loans) are about 4 times too dear. [Based on house prices being 12 times income in London.] There are two solutions to this. Either quadruple wages or diving house prices by 4 (or a combination of the two). Neither is palatable and both have terrible consequences, but so it allowing the present situation to persist and heaven help us, get worse. The public finances are trivial by comparison.

I hold Mervyn King and the rest of the financial regulatory edifice responsible for allowing this to happen - they knew, they were told and they did nothing about it. The fact is, it has happened, but it also has to be fixed. Just ask yourself a simple question about interest rate structures a decade ago (and for time immemorial before that) and today. Then savers got less than base rate and borrowers paid more - now both savers and borrower get more and pay more than base rate - that is the complete financial structure of regulation has collapsed and this is all due to the incompetent regulation.

This cataclysmic problem has to be solved by the Government and there are no answers even difficult ones that any individual party dare implement, yet a solution will be implemented - the market will ensure that this takes place. The sooner sanity is restored the sooner the country can genuinely recover - Ed Miliband may be forced to take more responsibility than he wants to, far sooner than he wishes or expects!

Why all this fear of a little lean to the left? . This government is hell bent on dismantling the state and minimising it's responsibilities . They seem to be trying to turn this country into Little America - so if you want one in ten out of work and one in seven on welfare ( in the Big Society they will need of lots of volunteers to man the soup kitchens ) then Dozy Dave , Sneaky Nick and Rich are the ones for you .
The important figures are just being announced - a rise in the number of applications to join the Labour Party since Ed won. This should speak volumes to the leadership of all political parties - that the man in the street finally thinks he has found someone to speak for him.

The problem is that Ed will not be able to "tack away from the unions and into the centre ground". Financially, the Labour party is once heavily reliant on the unions and cannot now function without them

no 54 John-from_Hendon
John, you mention the problem of housing costs, and I find that very intersting. Rigth from the early 1980's it is true that house prices kept on rising at unsustainable rates. Like everything else in the capitalist system, prices of houses are determined by supply and demand. The banks and building societies simply competed to lend, and then lent more and more. Some people were getting 5 or 6 time their income, and sometimes mortgages of over 100%.
The result is that the demand for houses was artificially inflated and so the prices rose at unsustainable rates.

In fact was it not the American housing market that burst the bubble and started the world wide crisis that we are now in?

Government from 1980 onwards needed to act, but it was against political dogma. Mervyn King rightly seems to accept that he and his lot in the financial sector have caused the problem. So my question is why should public sector employees, doctors, nurses, police, teachers and the like all have to bear the brunt of the hardship while the financial sector carry on payingthemselves high wages and a big bonus.

54. At 10:43pm on 26 Sep 2010, John_from_Hendon wrote:
There seems to be a great insanity overpowering all rational political debate at present. The Tory Liberal Coalition will destroy itself as a direct result of 'solving' the deficit in the public finances. Just as Labour lost the election by being lumbered as the incumbents who had to destroy the public finances to rescue the banks. This financial malaise has a very long way to run. (Everyone knows this fact of life - and this is why the Tory/Liberal coalition wants to force five year parliaments as a priority.)

---------------------------------------------------------------

I agree, with the view of there being a malaise, but this is not just to be expected in a single Financial Sector, but more over generally thoughtout the World at every level in ALL Sectors, for we simply don't know what will happen tomorrow, and for the most part whatever happens next we ALL in the UK will NOT at best be able to weather the Storm that leads us to incur further Financal Debts, while at the same time NOT being able to Invest in our future, to go for Growth.

Therefore, someone has to find a different way out, otherwise under the Plans of the Con-Demned Coalition we could very easily be in a much worse position and situation then we are currently today in, before the Cuts start to bite.

56. At 10:55pm on 26 Sep 2010, bfcpete wrote:
The problem is that Ed will not be able to "tack away from the unions and into the centre ground". Financially, the Labour party is once heavily reliant on the unions and cannot now function without them

------------------------------------------------------------

There is NO POINT in every Political Party being rooted in the Centre - Ground of British Politics, since the 2 Parties that are, the Dumb and Dumber Con-Demned Coalition Government are already in resident there.

Therefore, rather than having a very narrow Debate about all things the same in the Centre, we need a real opposition Party in Labour under Ed Miliband to revive some real original thinking about real fairness in ALL Sectors of British Society, even if this doe's include the Trade Union movement.

57. Jeremy Preece wrote:

Like everything else in the capitalist system, prices of houses are determined by supply and demand.

===

Wrong!

Price of houses determined by ease of credit. Do not buy into the crowded island supply and demand argument.

If property developers were to build more houses, there wouldn't be the take up to reduce house prices because of supply; if the banks aren't lending, no one is going to be able to buy.

Also if the BOE rate were not kept so artificially low with government meddling, prices would come tumbling down naturally to meet the supply and demand you talk about.

However an unfortunate side effect would be that repossessions would go up which is why GB and DC have steered clear of interest rate rises.

Because of easy credit, house prices have risen which is why in future they are bound to come down or at the very least allow sufficient time to pass until they settle at their true value which may be many years to come.

PS About the education point. Not everyone who goes to Eton ends up at the top of the tree. A place at this institution is no guarantee of success, only an opportunity which is the point that should have been made.

I'm surprised that you did not make all those comments about dynastic politics, family feud, clan politics amd other epithets that the 91Èȱ¬ and other media use against the al-Assads, Kim Jung Ils Mubaraks, Kadafis and Gnassingbes of this world. I am not flabbergasted because these are doing the "best thing", but because in their own national contexts, they are no different from what the Millibands are to the British Labour party.

no 60
andfinally,

I maintain as I said in 57 that the price of everything in the captialist society is determined by supply and demand.
I also said that supply had been inflated by the rate at which banks and building societies lent money, and thus drove up the prices.
In other words a distortion in an imperfect market. I don't see the difference between what I said and what you are saying. Maybe you got to the line about supply and demand and then launched off.

It would be interesting to know why my comment still is being considered after several hours. It was a pretty basic comment, though mildly critical of the journalism of this piece.

60. At 11:26pm on 26 Sep 2010, andfinally wrote:
57. Jeremy Preece wrote:

Like everything else in the capitalist system, prices of houses are determined by supply and demand.

===

Wrong!

Price of houses determined by ease of credit. Do not buy into the crowded island supply and demand argument.

If property developers were to build more houses, there wouldn't be the take up to reduce house prices because of supply; if the banks aren't lending, no one is going to be able to buy.

Also if the BOE rate were not kept so artificially low with government meddling, prices would come tumbling down naturally to meet the supply and demand you talk about.

However an unfortunate side effect would be that repossessions would go up which is why GB and DC have steered clear of interest rate rises.

Because of easy credit, house prices have risen which is why in future they are bound to come down or at the very least allow sufficient time to pass until they settle at their true value which may be many years to come.

PS About the education point. Not everyone who goes to Eton ends up at the top of the tree. A place at this institution is no guarantee of success, only an opportunity which is the point that should have been made.

---------------------------------------------------------------

The Housing Market is staying depressed due to fears of another Recession, and the reduction in Full-Time Jobs again due to rising Unemployment after the Public Spending Cuts start kicking - in.

What we will be seeing is a slight boom in Christmas Sales and early January Sales whereby domestic spending will take place right up until the rise of VAT next January, whereby afterwards we will be seeing many small and medium size Shopping outlets Close-Down due to a Winter drop off in demand for luxury and non-everyday items.

This will be the beginning of a protracted down-hill spirial period which will further contract the High-Street over the full term of this Coalition Government, while ALL the time Unemployment rises.

Sofar, the Coalition don't have a single clue as to how to create Growth in the UK Economy all the time Capital is being diverted into paying off the UK Deficit, but also however due to any lack of vision as to how the UK Economy can be turned around, this in Government is being given very little, or NO attention in future Planning or Policy.

You don't know what you're talking about Robinson.
You're winging it again.

NR: So, here's what is clear tonight:

* It would be a devastating blow to Ed Miliband if his brother simply walked away

* Unless David specifically requests to stay put, he needs to be offered a move from his current job as Shadow Foreign Secretary

* David can not easily be made Shadow 91Èȱ¬ Secretary given that crime was one of the few policy areas that divided the brothers in the leadership contest. Ed endorsed Ken Clarke's promise to reduce the prison population. David regarded it as a political open goal for Labour.

* That leaves the job of Shadow Chancellor. Appointing Ed Balls to the job would infuriate Alistair Darling - given Balls's criticism of Darling's promise to cut the deficit in half in four years - and the party's remaining Blairites.

Giving the job to Yvette Cooper - who is, of course, Mrs Ed Balls - might seem to be a neat solution but it would look like a ruse to keep Balls out of the job.

Only by appointing his brother to the job could Ed avoiding upsetting David and the Blairites. What's more Ed Balls couldn't protest if the man who very nearly won the leadership became the shadow chancellor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In 'seniority' terms, F.Sec and H.Sec are equivalent. Moving David to the 91Èȱ¬ Office would be pointless.

Balls and Cooper would not only give the media plenty to kick around, it may also guarantee The Coalition a win in the next GE.

There is a good case for Ed Milliband to keep David as F.Sec and, more importantly, Alastair Darling as CoE. That would be an immediate, albeit small, riposte to the The Coalition.

It would also draw the teeth of the media somewhat!

Here's an idea - why don't Labour decide who will be their Shadow Chancellor based on who has the best economic qualifications and experience for the job, rather than on the basis of who is best mates with who, who is married to who, who is brother of who, or whether appointing one person would offend or win approval from another?

'67. At 08:38am on 27 Sep 2010, Andrew Oakley wrote:

Here's an idea - why don't Labour decide who will be their Shadow Chancellor based on who has the best economic qualifications and experience for the job, rather than on the basis of who is best mates with who, who is married to who, who is brother of who, or whether appointing one person would offend or win approval from another?

The very idea.

Albeit a very good, common sense one.

No wonder it would not occur to our P(PE)oxbridge brigade in the politico-media infirmament in a million years.

The order of things... is settled.

If he doesn't run... others might. Anybody out there gonna' ask Harriot Harman, are you game Nick?

Better get plenty of pens n' notepads looks like we're in for an interesting period.

Who said a leopard can't change it's spots?