The Bewilderness

The approaching Juncker moment

Cameron appointed Lord Hill as his Commissioner prospective, a pro-European Tory and a former special adviser to Kenneth Clarke. After the isolation, the Prime Minister may have viewed this appointment as an ameliorative measure. It cut no ice with the head of the European Parliament, Martin Schulz. Forgetting the limits of his constitutional power under the treaty, Schulz thundered that Hill would never become a Commissioner because he was a Eurosceptic Tory. Having only the power to vote down the entire set of Commissioners, Schulz soon sulked and backtracked muttering that gender balance was more important. Yet, for Britain, an important moment, reinforcing the Juncker moment. The visceral dislike and instant assumption of British Euroscepticism as an ideological taboo for EU positions means that negotiation for reform is unlikely to happen.

Now, Juncker is seeding the press with further comments on the British position and possibly preparing to render Lord Hill a non-entity. The choice of portfolio marks a clear sign of European perceptions in regard to the position of the UK in Europe. A minor portfolio suggests that Brexit is considered a positive option and there will be no compromise on a halfway house. A decent portfolio marks a negotiating concession. And if Britain doesn't leave, we are then sidelined as a walkover: this is known as the Miliband option and is the preferred future of the supine Liberal Democrats (the party without a backbone so they can U-turn as fast as possible).   

Scumference

What is the Labour equivelent of HS2? Overriding the planning rules through central diktat. More central planning through new towns and allowing councils to plan new build on neighbouring councils' land. So, Labour protects its own municipal land and builds on other councils.

And we shoudl believe these scum? after they brought British politics into the sewer. One word we will not hear from this vomit faced hypocrite is sorry: apologising for the damage he did to this country; the lives runied by his government's errors; and the blight yet to be from any. problems caused by his imbecilic policies, giving Labour, that corrupt sump, an opportunity to piss more heavily on some than on others.

What difference is there between the pigs in Animal Farm and Miliband's millionaires in the Shadow Cabinet: both shout their slogans "Two Legs bad ("the Few"), Four Legs Good ("the Many").

This is truly the Cirscumference season 

 

Miliband's Conference hokey cokey

Ed Miliband is under growing pressure to offer an In-Out referendum on the European Union. He could outflank Cameron, show leadership and prevent votes defecting to UKIP, his advisers whisper to him. They can say whatever so like as long as the fool makes a manifesto promise. Mandelson calls it "clinically insane"...must be the rational course of action then!

The Brown Bust, 2010 and counting

The money ran out in 2010. So ran a note by a departing Labour Minister: one finale epitaph on that irresponsible administration. Some will call this a lost decade; but better to rename this: Brown's Bust. 

The Guardian sets out a series of welfare changes that come into effect in the next two months. These changes represent a reduction in the amount of benefits received and reduce the scope by which entitlements can be rewarded. This will not reduce the welfare bill; only its rate of increase. The article is entitled by Patrick Wintour, their political editor, as the day that the Coalition changed Britain. 

Rather OTT, as the alternatives are far less palatable. Reduce benefits in Irish or Greek terms and embrace destitution. That day may still come. Have Labour and its slavish press forgotten that the money to pay for their client state must be raised abroad and, if no money is raised, no benefits can be paid.

Labour opened the sluicegates of debt. All else is incidental detail designed to deal with the consequences.   

One Nation under Ed

Looking at utterances from a minor member of the Labour Shadow Cabinet can give us a better insight into the attitudes of the party as a whole. Shadow Welsh Secretary Owen Smith was interviewed by Welsh Online for the Labour conference. Two themes underline his statements: a divisive and political arrogance reinforcing a belief that they represent a collective notion of the people (even if this is not what the people actually want). Add a reference to plebs (since toffs is becoming a tired trope and does not fit the 'One Nation' idea).

Owen Smith wants more devolution for Wales (though this seems a token effort) and one assumes that the primary model of decentralised assembly, Labour dominance is preferred here. His main message was about the unity of working people and that only Labour's values could represent the country. This echoes the similar presumptive arrogance of New Labour who packaged themselves as the political wing of the British people, a rhetoric converging upon national socialist and fascist regimes of the nineteen-thirties. It is also ill-at ease with the complex and fractured politics now at play in the country.

Unable to corral this landscape, Labour is infantilising itself with wooden messages of unity and arrogating moral lanscapes that reflect some halcyon past. Owen Smith calls for a real weekend and the repeal of Sunday trading laws. Yet, when the law was relaxed, most people aimed for the supermarkets and used the time as they saw fit. Such economic liberties, "markets crowding moral arguments out of politics", are anathema to those who wish to impose their values upon us. In fact, politicians have crowded out markets through their uncontrolled spending and have allowed many to experience the increased value of free time through rising unemployment and regulations that destroy jobs. 

We will all certainly have more free time and less choice as One Nation under Ed.

Financial ferrets in a regulators' sack

Until now, the public has received little or no evidence of collusion between banker and regulator in relation to the manipulation of the markets. Nor have they understood the wider political framework within which such contacts took place. The FSA's investigation of Barclays bank has revealed ambiguous communications between the bank, Bank of England and unnamed parties within Treasury. 

The speculation is forthcoming but this could have profound implications for the Labour party, if the parliamentary investigations uncover evidence of co-operation between government and banks. Miliband's cynical distancing from the last government will be undermined by a reminder that Labour were in hock to banks, just as they are now in hock to Unite.

Nor does this let the government off the hook. Osborne's judgement may prove even more flawed when it becomes clear that his chosen vehicle for clean-up is besmirched by the antics of his predecessors. The Bank of England will suffer reputional damage and the FSA has one final triumph: kicking its rivals after they have succeeded in eviscerating its role.

We can look forward to a few weeks of kicking lumps. 

Volatility and unpopularity in the polls

All three mainstream leaders are now suffering from low ratings. All that has changed is that Cameron now joins Clegg and Miliband. Perhaps it was only a matter of time and adverse publicity. As Mike Smithson points out it is unprecedented for all three leaders to suffer from such disillusionment on the part of the electorate.

Yet, this may prove most dangerous for Miliband. With a Labour lead in the polls and an unpopular leader, the temptation to look for a more popular candidate will increase. An unpopular budget and a week that undermined notions of competence have wounded the Coalition. None of these indicate that we have faced a change in polling or a swing to Labour, when Galloway's victory points to increased volatility.

Labour's leader declares the momentous 'Miliband moment'

In his interview with 'The Observer' today, Ed Miliband, the Labour party leader, capitalises upon the misfortunes of the government. In strategic terms, this is an interview designed to set an agenda: a redescription of media perceptions (with public following) in Labour's favour. Could one even view this as an unholy alliance between Miliband, an opportunistic camp follower of Gordon Brown, and Rupert Murdoch, whose press, after the demise of the 'News of the World' is directed with fervour against the Tory party?

Miliband argues that the Coalition (though he never mentions the Liberal Democrats) or, the Tory government, will only last for one term and that Labour will rule thereafter. This is stated with such force as a political prediction. He also hails the end of the "Cameron project", a unity of purpose, plan and principle that flatters his opponent.

Where Miliband's judgement rings with a true note is the unique victory of George Galloway in Bradford, caused mainly by anti-tactical voting against Labour, as Tory voters switched to Respect. Yet, he must ask himself why was there a tactical vote in this manner: a reverse from the anti-tactical vote against the Tories from 1997 onwards? This by-election may yet hold nasty surprises yet.

Miliband faces his own weaknesses and his triumphalism at others' incompetence may yet be premature. In his interview, he does not mention the Liberal Democrats: a silence that confirms he is not confident of gaining a majority at the next General Election and anticipates a coalition with the Liberal Democrats. Nor did he reference the London mayoral election, as Ken is no shoo-in.

Miliband's Achilles heel may have been obscured by Francis Maude's public relations disaster, but the unions will act in a radical fashion as cuts in public exepnditure begin to bite. The more that they campaign and strike, to the silence of the Labour leadership, the more that question marks over Miliband's leadership will emerge. Just as Cameron reached a high point in December with the EU 'veto', so Miliband gains strength over the torrid week and a poorly presented budget. The jury is still out as to whether this is a permanent turn against the Coalition or another high mark or low mark (depending upon perceptions) in a volatile time, as the electorate views all political parties as a plague. George Galloway's victory suggests the latter.

UPDATE: Further reflections on Miliband's interview only highlighted his omissions. Where were his thoughts and ideas on the London mayoral election, Scottish independence and European changes? Any mention of these changes could potentially topple the thin veneer of control that he projected to his chosen audience. 

With the number of potential disruptions that could adversely affect Labour's electoral advantages, Miliband's public silence disguises private misgivings (at best), and more likely, palpitations.