The Balls leaks

I really don't see why Brownites would leak against Balls unless it was just purely to bring him down a few pegs.

I can see why any number of people would want to get at Ed Balls, he's well and truely made that bed so he has to sleep in it, but why Brownites? He is, after all, the number 2 to Brown. Unless there's something there I don't know, which is very possible



Tweet

Does the government need a 'Plan B'?‏

A lot of this is clearly speculative, but I did tell (everyone) so.
Taking demand out of the economy has seen a slowing of the economy. The stimulus package kept the economy going reasonably but the cuts have begun to hit it, and hard. Another problem is confidence as if people think there will be a recession then it is far more likely to happen.
Aside from my gloating, there are some pretty serious issues here. I feel the economic problems with my inability to get a decent job or even security in the shitty one I have.
The political bits of this really are not as important to me as the effects on my life and prospects, but this would be hugely damaging to both coalition parties if the economy tanks. If that's the case Labour will have an open goal for 5/10 years. And given Ed miliband's performances I think we might need it. Ed Balls is a heavy weight so might add something there but has the potential to fuck everything up and piss everyone off.
What matters to me is my job and lively hood, my prospects in the short, medium and long term. The inside of the Westminster bubble does not greatly concern me at the moment

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2011/02/does_the_govern.html

Balls on Blair on the deficit

I agree with Ed Balls that reducing spending too quickly could spell disaster, but i disagree that the deficit was not too big previously.
When Brown came in he started tackling a hugh deficit left to us by the Tories, but he abandoned that.
I also disagree on tax as i would prefer to see a rise in direct tax and cuts where possible in indirect tax

David Miliband's party

Judging by this, i never want to go to one of David Miliband's parties.
The thing is, the bloke seems to have the personality of a calculator. He's a brilliant policy geek, just like a (pun intended) rich-man's, clean-shaven, not-socialist Bearded Socialist.
I am a policy geek, oh yes i am. But i bet my parties are more fun than David Miliband's. Which is probably why he'll lead the Labour party and I won't.

I'm getting really narcoleptic about the leadership election actually. For a start they're too young.

David Miliband is too slimy, arrogant and dull for me as a leader. i think he's a poor man's Tony Blair.

Ed Miliband is not any where the finished article for me. i know a lot of people who's opinion i respect are going for him, but i thought he was very patchy and inconsistent on the Guardian politics podcast i listen to and that's a fair reflection i think. Sure, he's young and has time on his side, but we are election the person we think should be able to be prime minister tomorrow.

Ed Balls is brilliant but a rough bruiser. he's probably my personal favourite but i think he'd be a poor leader, he's more a behind the scenes man due to his personality and sytle. abrasive to say the least. a friend of mine described him as 'gordon brown' without the good bits and i think the puplic at large would take to Balls about as well as Gordy.

Andy Burnham is too young. he's got potential but hasn't been able to stamp his authority on the race. definately a talent, and should be in and around this batch, maybe in ten years time he will have grown into his potential.

Diane Abbott "is arguably the most left-leaning of all the candidates, but her lacklustre pitch so far has mainly consisted of repeatedly pointing out that her opponents are all Caucasian men." Sums her up perfectly

Ed Balls: 'They said we were not on their side, that we lost touch'

I think Balls has been the most impressive contender so far in that he seems to have the best idea of why Labour was kicked out (the fairness thing) and his stated willingness to stand aside to allow his wife into the contest. It's a shame she refused as she would be my choice.

Don't underestimate Ed Balls | Mehdi Hasan

""Ken rightly criticised us for not being tough enough on financial regulation." (Yesterday, Livingstone returned the compliment, telling the BBC that he planned to back Balls in any future Labour leadership contest.)"

Interesting.
I personally think he's alright, and I might well be inclined to back him if I get a vote

If the ghastly Ed Balls loses his seat, that will be my 'Portillo moment'. Who will be yours? - Telegraph Blogs‏

"When I found out Balls had got caught talking on a mobile while driving, I couldn't help think: haven't you taken enough risks with our children?"

Ah ha ha. Typical right-wing media bollocks there. Made me smile, if not laugh out loud. When I found out Balls had got caught talking on a mobile while driving, I couldn't help think: haven't you taken enough risks with our children?

Newsnight special on education

I didn't get to see all of the programme on wednesday because i was watching the football, but i will watch it again.
Ed Balls was very impressive, as he often is.
More to come later

Public spending

So, public spending then eh?
Martin Wolf has never been my favourite academic, but this piece is interesting.
I've always quite liked Ed Balls. But his going on about keeping high spending on education strikes me as a bit misguided at best. I know he's not (yet) chancellor, but he does know a thing or two about money and that.
I know the public finances are tight and there may be some very tough decisions to make after the election/recovery, and i'm no economist. So why is Balls going on like he's just struck oil? Well, it's politics i suppose. It would certainly be nice to raise spending left, right and centre. But the problem is that there is not enough to go round. Ever. That's the nature of politics, economics, life etc. etc. So unless he can pay for it, he shouldn't spend it.

The whole thing at the moment is very interesting regarding the finances because the debt draws the question of how to pay it off. The usual arguements about tax and spend tend towards the moral, whether the rich should pay more etc. Now we have the situation where the priority is to shrink the debt so i'm a lot more willing to listen to (note not agree with) those who would argue about lower taxes funding growth. I certainly think the rich should pay higher taxes and leave quietly if they wish to. I would like to see big, high, HUGE taxes for the rich. If they leave then we have a more equal society if not world (hopefully world too). But because of the (possible) need for their money, it may be more important to rake the money in than to string up the rich

Rant

Bloody hell.
First, Alistair Darling. I'm a fan. I think he's a level-headed, chilled and dependable minister. I've got great faith in Darling, despite Brown's meddling in the treasury.
To see him being hounded out is pretty sad, as he's doing a pretty good job all told.

I'm a fan of Ed Balls, so I wouldn't really mind him taking over. But not when Darling is doing ok, and he's a bit young.
On Today this morning they reported the Daily Mail calling him a 'a middle-class-hating Socialist zealot'. What a load of bollocks.

Then Cameron was on Today talking about expenses. He was asked what he plans for 'reasonable' expenses were, how he would define them. He said that it was what a reasonable person would believe reasonable, and would be no more committal than that. What bollocks, talk about having no conviction. He is talking some good talk about reform and some good things, but then he goes and lets himself down by not backing up his grand words, typical of the man

Balls (and Cooper)

Labour home is discussing the possibility of Ed Balls being moved to Chancellor.
I quite like Balls myself, he's very passionate, a bit tribal, really clever and determined.
Whether he'd make a good chancellor, not yet i'd say. He's much too young for something like that I think.
However, once again the issue of expenses came up and the idea that he has some sort of injunction protecting him, but seeing as he's already been covered and found not guilty, I have a feeling it may be anti-Labour bollocks. Seeing how things are for us right now, i don't much see the point