Ed balls

Is this the endorsement that Brown was looking for?  Sky and the BBC report that the Business Secretary is putting out the message that the PM has the support of his Cabinet colleagues. Meanwhile, the good folk at Comment Central are running a Cabinet Watch, tracking which members of the Cabinet have come out in support of Brown.  Only three, so far – although they haven’t added Mandelson yet (or Ed Balls, who is currently on Sky talking about “getting on with the job”).  All eyes on Darling, Johnson, Harman and Miliband now.

Ok, Coffee House has given the Tories short-shrift in recent weeks, but this is a reaction born of frustration. The election should be a walkover. At their best, the Tories have the radical policies, and to a certain extent the team, to rescue Britain from its current Labour-inflicted quandary. Yet the party remains tentative, fearful of its own shadow. It should not be. Labour deserves to lose, and not only in retribution for its record: the governing party has embarked on an open internecine war and is completely unelectable in consequence. Rachel Sylvester describes the paralysis: ‘Lord Mandelson is advocating a campaign based on aspiration, public service reform and fiscal

In the spirit of goodwill, Ed Balls has called-off the class war. As ever with Balls that is but half the story. Class war has not so much ceased as been re-branded. A Brown aide, quoted in the Independent, says that Labour’s strategy is concerned with “economic class, not social class”. So there we are; the impoverished squirearchy can sleep sound tonight: the Labour party is only interested if you’re nouveau riche – how gloriously snobby.  Whilst Balls’ spite for those born nibbling a silver spoon has allegedly lessened, his leadership machinations continue apace. Ever industrious, Balls passed Christmas by flirting with traditional Christian Socialists, offering them a morsel of encouragement about the importance of family and marriage to society, disregarding how his policies have compounded those institutions’ decline. Today he makes a pass

The Ed Balls leadership cart is revving up a gear. He wants to position himself as the main mover behind the election campaign, now that Gordon Brown is dead in the water. It was his plan to stop Darling jacking up VAT to 20 percent, so he can accuse the Tories of wanting to do that (it’ll be more like 22.5 percent IMHO – but that’s another story). And now Balls has told tomorrow’s Sunday Times that Labour’s election focus will be on the family. “In the past I think our family policy was all about children,” says Father Balls. “I think our family policy now is actually about the

It has started. The Labour attack unit is out today talking about a “Tory VAT rise” – as per Paddy Hennessy’s scoop. Osborne stated his (to me, relatively paltry) position on the deficit: that he’d reduce it faster than Labour but can’t say how much. The Labour attack unit keeps partying like its 1999 with the “Tory cuts” line, now augmented with a “Tory tax rise.” Here are the words which the attack unit has crafted for Stephen Timms, chief secretary to the Treasury: “George Osborne refuses to say what services he would cut or what taxes he would increase in order to cut the deficit ‘further and faster’ than

Ed Balls has given an interview to The Times Educational Supplement which contains a comically audacious attempt to rewrite history. When asked about whether he really wants to be in his current job, Balls tells the interviewer, “I have resisted moving”. Now, I suspect this will come as a bit of a shock to Alistair Darling who fought off an effort by Balls to take his job. 

Things never seem to go smoothly for Gordon.  On a day when the Telegraph carries details of his Whitehall savings programme, the FT has news that one of his closest allies, Ed Balls, is calling for relatively hefty spending increases elsewhere.  Apparently, Balls has asked the Treasury to grant his department – the Department for Children, Schools and Families – real-terms spending increases of 1.4 percent until 2014.  That’s an extra £2.6 billion in total – and goes beyond previous Labour commitments to “protect” schools spending. It’s a brassy move by Balls and one which is sure to aggravate his colleagues.  After all, remember when Labour called Cameron “Mr 10

Does Professor David Nutt’s dismissal concern the impossibility of relaxing drugs legislation, or the relationship between experts and ministers? David Nutt was sacked because he spoke the unspeakable and criticised the government for failing to acknowledge the self-evident scientific truth that horse-riding, especially after quaffing sherry, is more dangerous than taking ecstasy and dancing maniacally in a night club. As Bruce Anderson notes in today’s Independent, it is impossible to have a rational debate about drugs. The politics of narcotics always trumps evidence. Despite David Nutt’s eminently sensible view that classification must reflect quantifiable harm, for the benefit of proportionate punishment and effective education, disassociation from any leniency on drugs is a

Just what was in Barry Sheerman’s coffee this morning?  So far today, the schools committee chairman has used a couple of media appearances to a) call Ed Balls a “bully”, and b) criticise all three party leaders – including Brown – for their “cowardly party leadership” over the Legg review.  Punchy stuff, which makes you wonder whether he’ll be the de facto “Get Gordon Out” candidate for PLP chairman, after all.

If there was an award for most improved conference speaker it would go to David Miliband. Last year his lacklustre effort helped put an end to his putative leadership challenge. This year he showed delegates why he might be up to the job of being Labour leader after the next election. He has dropped his voice making him sound more serious and cut out the gurning. His comments about military force which sounded so absurd last year carried more weight this time round. However, he’s far from presentationally perfect. He still managed to get ahead of his autocue and hit the microphone with his hand when trying to emphasise a