Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Tired of Waiting

Cutting Deficit Would Be David Miliband's Priority As Labour Leader

Recommended Posts

“There is no point denying those things: they are true,” he planned to say (...)

David Miliband's priority 'as Labour leader was cutting deficit', leaked speech reveals

David Miliband planned to make cutting the deficit and public spending a priority if he had won the Labour leadership, it has emerged.

By James Kirkup, Political Correspondent

8:00AM BST 11 Jun 2011

A leaked copy of the victory speech Mr Miliband planned to deliver last September showed that he wanted to tell his party it had to promise “lean government” and could not be “in denial” about the deficit.

The speech was never given because the leadership was won by his brother, Ed Miliband, who has since taken a different line on the economy, opposing the Coalition’s plans for gdp100 billion of public spending cuts.

The publication of his speech means David Miliband, an ally of Tony Blair, joins the list of Labour figures opposed to Ed Miliband’s economic policy, a list that also includes Alistair Darling, the former chancellor.

Had he won, David Miliband planned to tell Labour that the deficit “is the biggest argument in politics, and the biggest danger for us. George Osborne (the Chancellor) says we are in denial about the deficit. Because he wants us to be. So let’s not be. It is a test.”

Labour would only regain power when voters believed it was prepared to tackle public spending, David Miliband wanted to say.

Related Articles

“The party will only be trusted when we show in word and deed that the alternative to mean government is lean government”.

“However much the coalition government are hated, we will not benefit until we are trusted on the economy, as we were in the 1990s”.

David Miliband also planned to tell Labour that Mr Osborne had been right to create the Office of Budgetary Responsibility, the independent forecaster of the public finances.

“There is no point denying those things: they are true,” he planned to say, according to a text published by the Guardian.

Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/8569698/David-Milibands-priority-as-Labour-leader-was-cutting-deficit-leaked-speech-reveals.html

Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jun/10/david-miliband-labour-leadership-speech

( Edit: In the next post, the actual speech's section about the economy. )

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The speech's full text: Link

Section about the economy pasted below :

_________________________________________________________________________________

Moral Economy

We face a massive question in domestic policy too: the future of our economy. It will define our country for many years to come.

We are a market economy. But I don't want to live in a market society.

I stand for a moral economy built on moral markets.

Markets because we do not fear private enterprise; we celebrate its success; in fact in constituencies like mine we want more of it.

Moral because we know it is wrong to play games with the welfare state; that is why we cut in half the level of benefit fraud we inherited from the Tories; but it is also wrong to play fast and loose with other people's money on the trading floors of the City.

Responsibility must run from top to bottom or else it does not run at all.

All parts of the country should contribute to success.

All parts of society need to benefit from growth.

And my quarrel with the government is they are getting this wrong at every turn.

This government is soft on the banks, hard on the poor, and dangerous for growth.

I believe in real welfare reform. Every 18-24 year old should be guaranteed a job after six months unemployment, and required to take it. We shouldn't be cutting the plan like the Tories are. We should be extending it.

I believe that the economy is still in the danger zone. We shouldn't be cancelling housing and school building programmes. These are private sector jobs in the construction industry. 300 000 people so far, thrown onto the scrapheap.

I believe in standing up for all parts of Britain. We are the only party saying that when [£750m] of European money is sitting in Brussels for the businesses of Cornwall, it is absolutely crazy for the Government to cut the British funding that would release that European funding.

We didn't win any seats in Cornwall. But we'll stand up for Cornwall. There will be no no-go areas under my leadership.

I believe government should support real engineering not financial engineering. The Tories are reducing support for manufacturing industry…to finance a corporation tax cut that will go to banks and supermarkets.

That is not rebalancing the economy; it is lining the pockets of the people who got us into the mess in the first place.

We should be doubling the £2bn bank levy to extend the investment allowances for manufacturing industry.

They are getting it wrong at every turn. We know the reason they give.

The deficit. And there is a deficit. A serious one. Which needs to be reduced.

Our government stepped in when the private sector collapsed. It should step back when it regains confidence.

This is the biggest argument in politics, and the biggest danger for us.

George Osborne says we are in denial about the deficit. Because he wants us to be. So let's not be.

It is a test.

I profoundly believe the Tories are wrong in their economic judgment. As they push up unemployment and push down confidence, the pain will be severe and real.

But however much they are hated we will not benefit until we are trusted.

Trusted on the economy as we were in the 1990s. Trusted because we show in word and deed that the alternative to mean government is lean government.

Step one is to recognise what is obvious: that we did not abolish the business cycle. We should never have claimed it. You can't in a market economy. And public spending plans cannot depend on it. Nor can you write your own fiscal rules and then be the judge and jury for how they are calculated and when they are met.

We should have been proposing the creation of an Office of Budgetary Responsibility and we should be campaigning today for its accountability to Parliament to be strengthened.

There is no point in denying those things; they are true.

Step two is to explain that it was not immoral to incur the vast bulk of the deficit to prevent recession turning into Depression; it was necessary; to protect your savings and rescue the economy. And when the history books are written people will admit Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling did lead the world.

Step three is to defend Alistair's decision to cut the deficit in half in four years. We need to grow the economy, raise taxes in a fair way and reduce spending. His plan was working. That's why the economy grew in the first half of this year. Fewer unemployed, lower than expected borrowing.

Step four is to recognise that we will need to go into the next election with new policies and plans. We are not going to make those policies until the economic context is clearer. And we are going to do so in a careful and deliberate way.

Every country in the world is thinking through the right approach to fiscal policy, and the right balance of rules and flexibility. No one is better qualified to assess those ideas than Alistair and he has agreed to lead a Commission on the right fiscal rules for the future, reporting to me and the new Shadow Chancellor.

Step five is to prosecute the case against the decision of the new Government to tear up Alistair's plans and embark on the most masochistic programme of spending cuts and tax rises since the 1930s.

The issue is not Labour's policy; it is the Tory policy of adding to Labour's plans [£666] of spending cuts and tax increases for every man, woman and child in the country.

Don't try to blame us Mr Osborne. We had a clear plan for reducing the deficit. You chose to go a lot further, a lot faster. Your choice. Your cuts.

It is not us in denial Mr Osborne.

It is you in denial – about jobs, about growth, about the lives and livelihoods that depend on a growing economy.

You are in denial because no country can cut its deficit unless it grows its economy. You prattle on about Canada in the 1990s. But Canada has a 3,000 mile border with the US which at the time was going through the Clinton boom.

You have taken the biggest economic gamble in a generation….with other people's lives.

David Cameron says his economic plan will "change our way of life". What he means is you the nurse your way of life, you the pensioner your way of life, you the aspiring university student your way of life, you the housewife your way of life, you the construction worker your way of life…

I guarantee you this: he doesn't mean his way of life.

They said in the election that any mug could save one pound in every 100 they spend. It would be easy to find waste.

What is the waste they have cut? The "waste" of university places. The "waste" of jobs for the unemployed. The waste of a nest egg for children.

I met Clare in June. For 24 years she has looked after her severely disabled daughter. Then finally in February this year, her daughter [NAME] moved into sheltered accommodation. For the first time she had a modicum of independence, and her mother some respite.

Until the cuts arrived. £200 a week Independent Living Fund – gone. So instead of a house that is the base for activity, she is now "warehoused". Not my word; Clare's word.

That's not a service that has been cut; it's a life that's been cut. Not my words. Clare's words.

This is not waste we are talking about. This is Clare's daughter's life. And we are going to fight for Clare and for people like her all over this country.

Economic judgement is one thing. Moral judgement is another. Let me make one.

To ask people like Clare's daughter to pay the price of your economic policy…and then claim it is fair and progressive…is just wrong.

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like a half decent speech. But another example, I fear, of Labour waste... Once Ed steps down as leader of the Labour party, there won't be any hunger for another Milliband leader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He sounds very much like a prudence and no more boom and bust man, oh yes. :lol::lol:

They're all so full of it.

The Telegraph news was very misleading. In the actual speech's section about the economy I could not find any difference between David M and Ed Balls' position - just halve the government's annual budget deficit by the end of this parliament.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like a half decent speech. But another example, I fear, of Labour waste... Once Ed steps down as leader of the Labour party, there won't be any hunger for another Milliband leader.

You are right, it does look good, and he would have delivered it well, much better than his adenoidal and weirder looking brother. But content-wise was as cr@p as any Balls'. So, "pheew!", David would have ben MUCH more dangerous for the country!

.

Edited by Tired of Waiting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Telegraph news was very misleading. In the actual speech's section about the economy I could not find any difference between David M and Ed Balls' position - just halve the government's annual budget deficit by the end of this parliament.

Quite likely.

I was reading the speech quoted (and yes likely he would have put it over very eloquently, they usually do but they have plenty of practice at it) and the claims for admission of past failures and promises of a form of prudence in future (although he didn't actually use the word prudence - as far as I'm aware).

So reminiscent of Brown's pre 1997 election speeches when he wanted to be elected. Blair's as well of course.

Then his remarks about technology and engineering. Reminiscent of Wilson's "White heat of technology" remarks in the 60s. Another worthless statement in a long list of worthless statements since those days.

My saying "they're all so full of it" wasn't directed especially at labour it applies to the coalition as well.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite simply, they don't what they're doing. They don't know what they're talking about.

Oh they do.

The message isn't for the financially informed, it's for the voting public.

They'd use the hand puppets of sincerity if it got them votes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hold on. Are they on the same financial planet as you. ;)

:)

No wonder we're in a mess. :lol:

There is no "we" which is why you are in a mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shoulda, woulda, coulda... Even IF this is the actual transcript (which I doubt), it is a moot point as he isn't in 10 Downing St, or even leader of the opposition. This is a bit like the Lib Dem manifestos of old - you can say what you want, safe in the knowledge the proposals will never see the light of day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe in real welfare reform. Every 18-24 year old should be guaranteed a job after six months unemployment, and required to take it

What jobs? Real jobs or made up ones?

It's easy for him to say all this now, much like phony election promising. They vanish very quickly when a politician gets into power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What jobs? Real jobs or made up ones?

It's easy for him to say all this now, much like phony election promising. They vanish very quickly when a politician gets into power.

Meh if only elections had cooling off periods..... or politicians were to be put to the sword if they reneged. We could televise it pay per view and the crucifixtions in wembly should help to reduce the deficit a little bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He has already stated this. To fix the debt problem we need growth. To fund that growth we need more debt.

Nice idea if the figures added up, which they don't. Which is why liebour keep harping on about some ideological 'fairness' and never mention actual figures.

Like incurring a 11% deficit to fund 1% growth. Its untenable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 276 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.