Forum home Road cycling forum The cake stop

So What do we think of "Red Ed"

tim wandtim wand Posts: 2,945
edited September 2013 in The cake stop
Following the key note speech from Labour leader Ed Milliband, many in the Media are saying that he is attempting to position the Labour party back to the left.

Key announcements today seem to be the following.

Putting a cap on what Energy/Utility companies can charge the public for 20 months, to give a Labour Government time to access the market and fairer energy charges.

Force "developers" who are holding on to land to develop it or loose it.

Make any company taking on and recruiting overseas employees to offer an equal number of apprenticeships for UK youth.


Although not traditionally a Labour supporter, On the surface I don't see too much to disagree with and its certainly nice to see a proper distinction in Polices as apposed to New Labours aping of the centre right and the current Coalitions lack of definition.
«13

Posts

  • me-109me-109 Posts: 1,365
    I think he's talking the usual political bull with no real way of backing up any of these 'ideas' - I won't call them 'policies' and give him the benefit of doubt.

    I don't think there will be too many outside the assembled audience that will really fall for that.
  • Mikey23Mikey23 Posts: 5,306
    Crowd pleasers... No substance all froth

    It would be rather nice if labour did manage to position itself somewhere where the Tories aren't .. To have two parties to the right of centre is rather confusing
  • mrfpbmrfpb Posts: 4,480
    Usual conference crowd pleasing froth. Any ideas of substance put forward at conferences tend to get nicked by the sitting government, so party leaders use their speech as an opportunity to re-establish their popularity and head off any challenges from within. And for Labour this means being Union friendly.
  • MattC59MattC59 Posts: 5,433
    Science adjusts it’s beliefs based on what’s observed.
    Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved
  • Stevo_666Stevo_666 Posts: 43,928
    He's still a charisma free [email protected] Short of having Balls or Harman in charge, it's the best the Tories could wish for.
    Whippet
    Bruiser
    Panzer
    Commuter

    "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]
  • tim wandtim wand Posts: 2,945
    During commentary on 5 live today. It was said that UK utility companies in Foreign ownership such as
    Scottish Power, EDF Energy, E.ON, n power and RWE are actually able to make higher price increases on UK customers than legislation in their own countries allows them to do on their own domestic markets.

    Its funny how the CEO of NPower has already been on saying that this will mean a lack of investment in energy infrastructure and could lead to blackouts.

    Why are foreign companies , which in some cases are Government owned in France and Germany able to make a profit out of de-nationalized UK utilities?

    This happens to the degree that they can subsidise their home markets with profits made in the UK.
  • The first two proposals are sound, the third I'm not sure about but certainly the aim of increasing vocational training is a good one.

    it's a hard life if you don't weaken.
  • ProssPross Posts: 25,338
    The development land thing is censored for several reasons:

    1. A lot of land doesn't get developed due to a long winded planning process and objectors.
    2. Very few developers sit on land for the fun of it but they need the right type of development and the right time to be profitable.
    3. It could backfire on communities who buy land to protect themselves from development.

    There seems to be a lot of tax and spend being planned, is that a good thing when an economy is recovering very slowly?
  • crispybug2crispybug2 Posts: 2,915
    The Labour version of William Hague!
  • davieseedaviesee Posts: 6,473
    Politician trying to get elected.
    At any cost.
    End of. :evil:
    None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.
  • I wouldn't go near his party on the basis of something you didn't mention but was reported on the radio this morning, votes for 16yr olds. It's bad enough with all the ignorant adults having a vote (the 'road tax' issue being a prime example, people with no clue as to how the system works) so I really don't think it should extended so we get ignorant children voting too. The age should be raised if anything with some sort of citizenship exam before you get a vote.
  • A total Richard Head. :lol:
  • He may come across as a bit of a wet fish, but he's not stupid. He knows he needs to go after those with an even lower public opinion rating than Labour, e.g banks, energy companies etc. Any rebuttal by the Tories looks like sticking up for the rich/powerful/evil.

    If I were a betting man, I'd say red-yellow coalition looks most likely for 2015.
    "That's it! You people have stood in my way long enough. I'm going to clown college! " - Homer
  • I'm a socialist, and I've not felt able to vote Labour since John Smith died. This isn't changing any time soon.
    Hell, I can't think of a Labour MP I've liked since Robin Cook died (although I have a soft spot for Dennis Skinner).

    For my money, Labour should a) Scrap HS2, b) end the awarding of rail franchises, so eventually the railways become state owned again, c) find some way to renationalise the water and energy industries, d) build council housing stocks up again, and e) ignore the Daily Mail.
  • VTechVTech Posts: 4,736
    Labour will not succeed with him at the helm and tories are revelling in that.
    He isnt liked, they should have got rid of him a while back because people live mainly off first impressions. (take this forum ;) )

    One person who I didnt think much of at the time but has proven himself over the years is William Hague.
    If he were up I would vote him.
    Living MY dream.
  • Ed is a decent bloke – he’s not a natural leader, not charismatic and a geek but you know what looking “prime ministerial/presidential” means you end up with pathological liars like Blair and Thatcher in charge or a PR lightweight like Cameron or Obama.

    And he is going to be the next PM as Labour should win the next election comfortably - any Lib Dem/Labour or Labour/Conservative marginal will go to Labour as the LD's vote is going to collapse. Bearing in mind the Tories couldn't get a majority when up against one of the most unpopular Prime Ministers in history last time round and they have virtually no seats outside of the South, they're screwed.
  • From what I understand a chunk of our current gas/electricity bills is a charge to subsidise green renewables which was introduced by the last Labour government!
  • arran77arran77 Posts: 9,260
    Like always this just all seems a bit 'smoke and mirrors' to me, it's all well and good making all these claims of what you plan to do but where's the substantiation to it all?

    If you freeze energy prices for the first 20 months after an election, the cynic in me just thinks that by saying that now it gives all the big energy companies enough time now to really ramp up the prices before an election so they don't take a hit after :roll:

    Stopping developers holding onto land is another ill conceived idea .

    I know that there are lots of other issues that get in the way of development such as funding, planning permission etc, but working in the construction industry I know that companies are wary of taking on work or starting a development during a recession because once the recession ends (and history suggests that they do), you've taken on work at rock bottom prices and are having to try and get subbies on board for the price you won the job for, but once the industry picks up there will be far more attractive jobs for them to take on.

    Forcing developers to start building at times that are sub-economic will be no good for the UK construction industry in my opinion and as construction is such a key part of the UK economy this is an ill thought out idea :roll:

    Like I said, a little substantiation to some of these pledges would be useful :wink:
    "Arran, you are like the Tony Benn of smut. You have never diluted your depravity and always stand by your beliefs. You have my respect sir and your wife my pity" :lol:

    seanoconn
  • It's a little unfair that people are so ready to criticise him. I think he's done very well considering that for years, he was just a bit-part player in many of the Nick Parks films.

    Given he's also married to a women who looks like she is made of 97.3% pure barbed wire, he should also get some credit for his bravery.
  • simonheadsimonhead Posts: 1,399
    So three totally unworkable ideas that are there to lure voters in.
    Life isnt like a box of chocolates, its like a bag of pic n mix.
  • GiantMikeGiantMike Posts: 3,139
    Because I'm housebound I watched the speech. It was quite cringe-worthy as he milked the audience for applause for the NHS, the Police, the Armed Forces etc. It was painful as he just listed British institutions and the idiots in the audience burst into applause. It highlighted that there is actually very little difference between the major parties and that 98% of their policies are essentially the same anyway and it's just the minor policies on the fringes that will change.

    The 'Land development' policy highlights what parties have to do to differentiate themselves from each other. You can't force somebody to develop land; it's a free choice in a competitive economy. And if they don't develop the land, what would to Govt do? Planning permission means that the local planners approve a development but it's not a contract that it will be developed.

    Do I think he'd be a good leader of a Labour govt? Absolutely not. Remembering a speech and leading a back-stabbing bunch of individuals are very different skills. I wonder what real-world skills he has and how well he did in his extensive pre-Labour Party employment history.
  • GiantMikeGiantMike Posts: 3,139
    simonhead wrote:
    So three totally unworkable ideas that are there to lure voters in.
    Seems so. It's the politics of envy. Make most of the people think they're 'have nots' and promise more jam tomorrow, taking the jam from the 'haves'.
  • simonheadsimonhead Posts: 1,399
    Met his brother on the train to Edinburgh earlier in the year, he was happy to have his photo taken with our rugby tour but wouldnt do shots with us.

    The apprentice scheme is actually quite scary, it is very difficult to legitimately employ someone from outside the EU and many of the ones that do are not the sort of businesses that could offer apprentice schemes. Labour would then have a choice to either lose face and can the scheme or relax immigration rules to make it easier to employ foreign nationals facing a backlash from their voters.
    Life isnt like a box of chocolates, its like a bag of pic n mix.
  • arran77arran77 Posts: 9,260
    GiantMike wrote:
    The 'Land development' policy highlights what parties have to do to differentiate themselves from each other. You can't force somebody to develop land; it's a free choice in a competitive economy.

    Totally agree with you on this one but I'm sure they'll come up with a new fangled version of the dreaded PFI or some other nonsense to try and get things going :roll:
    "Arran, you are like the Tony Benn of smut. You have never diluted your depravity and always stand by your beliefs. You have my respect sir and your wife my pity" :lol:

    seanoconn
  • jonomc4jonomc4 Posts: 891
    edited September 2013
    The apprenticeship scheme it total bull and can be pulled apart at the drop of a hat - i.e. the number of people employed from outside Europe is minimal - most people come here and gain the right to work through immigration - the number who actively employed is small. Also the apprenticeships themselves cannot be offered only to UK citizens - they have to be offered to all EU persons.

    The energy policy is total bull - all the energy companies will do is increase prices before the election to cover their asses - so whoever wins we will end up paying more - thanks Ed now we have a guarantee of higher prices - how can they be so stupid?

    I just wonder who is going to pay for all his give-aways to "the poor" - tax us more? Or maybe like the last labour government - make up lots of new taxes and then end up hiring so many public servants to manage the new taxes that they end up costing 1/2 of what is taxed in admin. Oh I know - why not borrow the money from the markets by issuing loads more gilts? Oh censored they did that before and look where that one ended up (at least not as bad as Spain, Italy et all though) - they will end up having to not control the banks to hard as their profits make a nice load of taxes to pay for everything - until it all goes wrong that is. Oh I know lets do PFI's - the fact our kids kids are going to pay that bill doesn't seem to bother anyone.

    Just as we are getting out of a recession built by their last term - we get them back - one step forward two steps back. I think as a minimum GCSE Economics should be passed with an A before people are allowed to vote - I thank you rant over.

    P.S. he looks like Wallace.
  • davieseedaviesee Posts: 6,473
    GiantMike wrote:
    .... I wonder what real-world skills he has and how well he did in his extensive pre-Labour Party employment history.
    I don't think you understand the modern politician.
    Ed, for example, has only held one job between university and full time politics. And that was as a TV researcher, for - politics, and it was only for a year before he was recruited full time into politics.
    Fairly standard route these days. Imagine a Chancellor that actually had experience in finances or accounting? :twisted:
    None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.
  • GiantMikeGiantMike Posts: 3,139
    daviesee wrote:
    GiantMike wrote:
    .... I wonder what real-world skills he has and how well he did in his extensive pre-Labour Party employment history.
    I don't think you understand the modern politician.
    Ed, for example, has only held one job between university and full time politics. And that was as a TV researcher, for - politics, and it was only for a year before he was recruited full time into politics.
    Fairly standard route these days. Imagine a Chancellor that actually had experience in finances or accounting? :twisted:
    My sarcastic point was that Ed, like a lot of politicians, has never lived in the 'real world'.
  • ProssPross Posts: 25,338
    For all this Red Ed label that apprenticeship proposal is so right wing it sounds like he picked up the BNP conference speech by accident! It would effectively be a tax to business employing 'foreigners'. Next we will hear a Labour leader making comments like 'British job for British workers'. Oh, wait a minute.......

    So even though his policies are being painted as left wing pandering to the Unions he isn't scared to go borderline facist if he thinks it will be popular. I might not be a socialist but at least in the past their politicians had the courage of their convictions and would stand by their left wing policies even if it meant not getting elected. Better to be in opposition and stand by your principles than to get elected at all costs.
  • arran77arran77 Posts: 9,260
    GiantMike wrote:
    daviesee wrote:
    GiantMike wrote:
    .... I wonder what real-world skills he has and how well he did in his extensive pre-Labour Party employment history.
    I don't think you understand the modern politician.
    Ed, for example, has only held one job between university and full time politics. And that was as a TV researcher, for - politics, and it was only for a year before he was recruited full time into politics.
    Fairly standard route these days. Imagine a Chancellor that actually had experience in finances or accounting? :twisted:
    My sarcastic point was that Ed, like a lot of politicians, has never lived in the 'real world'.

    What good would real world experience be, politics is just a game isn't it :wink:
    "Arran, you are like the Tony Benn of smut. You have never diluted your depravity and always stand by your beliefs. You have my respect sir and your wife my pity" :lol:

    seanoconn
  • davieseedaviesee Posts: 6,473
    arran77 wrote:

    What good would real world experience be, politics is just a game isn't it :wink:
    No. For them it is very serious indeed.

    They work very hard trying to figure out what the best gravy train is, and how to get on it as quick as possible.
    Very serious business. :wink:
    None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.
Sign In or Register to comment.