Robin Sharp on Ed Balls...

I once attended a charity function at Portcullis House and found myself enmeshed with Labour MPs - who were all really nice and caring people for whom I have the greatest respect. The subject of Ed Balls came up. They all turned green and I think would have used the term "toxic" had it been in the conversational lexicon in the moment.

Ed Balls is like Gordon Brown. Unlikeable, aggressive and toxic - but suited to climb within a political party filled with luuvies.

In a strange way Ed Balls is Ed Milliband's secret weapon. When he fails to make an impact on the economy - and he will fail because there will be a huge shock to the EU and US economy that is upon us as a result of his policies of high debt - then Ed can very publicly sack him knowing full well Ed Balls has absolutely NO support on the back benches. Ed Milliband will be cheered privately when he publicly sticks the knife into Ed Balls. It will mark the end of an era of toxic spinning started by Blair and Campbell. It will be a cathartic moment and a new start. Once out of power Ed Balls is nothing. His political climbing skills will make him an outcast with all the nice Labour back bench MPs. Ed Milliband really is the alter ego that Gordon tried to portray but never was. Ed Balls is Gordons toxic heart that we all need anaesthetic to deal with.

Robin Sharp commenting on Jerry Hayes' piece for Dale & Co.

Shoesmith, Balls & process

Agreeing with Ed Balls about anything may seem strange, but his decision to sack Sharon Shoesmith was correct. What a pity then, that he abandoned normal procedure in the way that he did it, laying himself open to this week's successful - and morally wrong - legal appeal. We now almost certainly face a compensation claim by an arrogant and incompetent (according to Ofsted) public servant with little or no conscience, now playing the victim.

The truth is that Labour built their centralised top-down state around procedure - of which the distorting impact of targets was the most obvious result. No doubt, in the case of 17 month old baby Peter, all the procedural boxes were ticked, all Sharon Shoesmith's department knew everything required of them about diversity, inclusion and multiculturalism. They just failed to prevent his death. At every miserable stage.

In Labour's legalistic society - remember them actually legislating to halve the deficit as if that would make it disappear? - procedure was more important than morality. Process was more important than people. Sharon Shoesmith says "You cannot stop the death of children" and "I don't do blame". She is the embodiment of everything that Labour's senior managers stood for. Devoid of conscience, humanity and of course responsibility for the department she lead.

And Mr Balls? His behaviour too was exactly what we have come to expect of the Labour party. They of course, enjoyed a "clunking fist" as their leader. Mr Balls was just another bully. 

Labour's blank sheet of paper

I can make no commitment to do anything differently says Ed Miliband  at a press conference designed to launch new economic policy initiatives yesterday. Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls went further Ed Miliband and I are clear on this; no commitments to reverse these changes, they would be irresponsible.

So, hold on. With all these cuts, all this noise, all these headlines, all these policy launches, Labour can make no commitment to do anything differently writes Matthew Hancock. Why, then, should we listen to a word that any Labour frontbencher says? After all, they can make no commitment to do anything differently.


The Government meanwhile, is embarked on radical reform. Things may appear difficult right now, as each vested interest makes their voice heard. But the Coalition are dealing with a huge number of long-standing problems in the national interest - a record deficit, reforming welfare, education, health, pensions, the police, supporting enterprise, and taking millions out of income tax. These reforms are not easy. The benefits will be felt over time. But the contrast is stark between the empty opposition of Labour, and the Government taking on the difficult challenges we face.
 

The wisdom of crowds

Three comments picked from Peter Oborne's piece 'Behind the Coalition's agreeable chatter, the real battle is beginning':

1. Balls' economic 'ability' is being hyped in precisely the same way Brown's was; he may well have a degree of erudition, but he is wrong about the road to recovery. He was entirely wrong about education and the Secret Family Courts, and was a negligent washout as Children's Minister. And he is almost universally loathed within the Labour ranks. (Hence the likelihood that he will come last in the leadership contest). John Ward.
2. "Balls insists that the Coalition has got the timing and nature of its cuts hopelessly wrong. He supports this thesis with an impressive array of economic reasoning and historical examples" says Peter Oborne.
   
   Nonsense. Balls's "historical examples" (1981 and 1931) show either a deep ignorance of economic history or a willful attempt to mislead. The statements he makes about both of these eras are factually untrue (for example, he claims that the Tories raised interest rates in 1981 and caused a recession - in fact, they cut interest rates and the economy grew from mid-1981). Balls's reasoning is only impressive if you forget to check out his 'facts'. HJ777 
3. Labour are desperate for a voice and your plan (Mr Oborne) is spot on. Get Ed Balls on the front bench attacking Cameron and Osbourne knowing full well he is up to his neck in s*** with the last lot. Perfect ammunition for Cameron. Nothing he says will have any credibility. This will be funny to watch. Panlid

Peter Oborne on coalition

Excellent piece from Peter Oborne in tomorrows Telegraph including the thoughts:

• ...the Coalition has pulled off a remarkable feat. It is simultaneously playing the role of Government and Opposition.
• ...the only thing that matters is the economic contest between Ed Balls and George Osborne. Only one of them can be proved right – and it will be winner take all.

Well worth a read.

Grade F Mr Balls

Telling interview with Ed Balls on Newsnight following yesterday's A level results. When asked why the attainment gap between State and private schools is still increasing after 13 years of New Labour educational spending, he could only offer the excuse 'because they're selective'.

No Mr Balls, they have always been selective. The only variable to change over that period has been the vast increase in spending on state education under your government.

Definitely an F grade for Mr Balls then. Not to mention the fact that the wonderful schools building program that achieved so little, was financed not out of current (New Labour) spending but by PFI.

So my children and grandchildren will still be paying for it in thirty years time. Double F Mr Balls.