Why Ed Miliband shouldn't be underestimated

ajs

Sensible to put out warning flags, of course; but overall, the general shape of things points to the Coalition having a fair wind for the long haul.

Richard of York

Why has the Spectator taken money from arms manufacture BAE?
The sleeze is now oozing out the the Tory blogs.
What next Free schools being sponsored By MacDonalds?

charles hercock

The main problem with Milliband Minor is his absolute lack of charisma

How can we warm to his leer/sneer

Fortunately for us Tony Woodley likes him and says so eloquently

Kirsty Richards

Totally agree with you James. The right (such as it is)should not be counting its chickens just yet. This is nothing like the 80's. Here are some reasons why:

1. 70% (and rising) of women are now in the labour market, back in Thatcher's day it was under 20%. A hell of a lot are in the public sector. Due to most women now in employment they don't have the luxury of the time to participate in Cameron's 'big society'. And when the services, they rely on for their kids, elderly family etc, start getting cut they will shout the loudest. There are also a lot more single parent families headed by working women who need sure start, working tax credits etc. When family benefits/welfare start being slashed the coalition are not going to know what has hit them.

2. Women are a big problem for the coalition as Labour have the likes of Yvette Cooper and Harman who, say what you like about them, know how to talk to the mumsnet/ordinary women vote. Compare to the like of Theresa May and Sarah Teather wealthy and no children, hardly the typical woman.

3. Most people are not as right wing economically as you politicos think. Outside the high earning Westminster bubble most people's standard of living is going down and Cameron has no policies to reverse this, like say tax cuts or Thatcher's right to buy. Also when ordinary people say they are worried about the economy they mean losing jobs, interest rates, being able to pay their mortgage and keep their homes, NOT the deficit. Most people couldn't explain what a deficit is.

4. On the economy in the 80's the choice was between American style capitalism prosperity or European stagnation. Now it's the reverse Germany is the shining example with good conditions and high pay for workers and a very good economy. Compared to Britain, America and Ireland it's a no brainer.

5. James you are right to identify culture. The Conservative party have abandoned social conservatives. On some things Clegg/Cameron are to the left of Labour. Law and Order, Gay rights and may others. Thatcher was right wing on everything economics, social issues, foreign policy and so was able to mobilise people who did not agree with her on everything but on the issues they did they felt very passionately. Cameron's Tories couldn't even win a majority against Gordon Brown.

I could go on but it's too long.

Kirsty Richards

This is a great pieced in the Telegraph that expands on some of the things I put in my earlier post.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/johnmcternan1/100053555/spending-cuts-the-coalition-has-a-problem-with-women/

Paddy

The Labour party may have fooled the electorate once.

But they won't do it again however they disguise it!

pg tips

Either Dave can attack and destroy cultural Marxism or he can merge with the Libdems. Which would he prefer? Merger. Red Ed and Red Cameron, what's the difference? Two men can get married, live as husband and husband together, anyone who complains goes to jail. Isn't that our future? The reds won. Red Cameron is their man.

JohnPage

Just what is the difference between "simplistic" and "overly-simplistic" (sic)?

denis cooper

"... all the seat projections are done on the current constituency boundaries which massively favour Labour".

Actually that wasn't how it worked out in May; the overall effect of unequal constituencies was not to "massively" favour Labour vis-a-vis the Tories, as the Tories like to complain, but to favour Labour to the extent of about six seats.

That's on the principle that the total number of seats won by a party should be in line with the total number of votes won by its candidates

A principle which of course the Tory party always rejects when it's suggested that it should be directly incorporated into the electoral system rather than left to chance, but which the Tory party now implicitly espouses to justify a wholesale restructuring of the parliamentary constituencies for its own small benefit.

Total votes cast for each party's candidates, divided by the number of Commons seats won by that party:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/default.stm

Tory 10,726,614 divided by 307 = 34,940
Labour 8,609,527 divided by 258 = 33,370

Dividing Tory + Labour votes by Tory + Labour seats = 34,223, and on that ratio Tories would then have got 313 seats.

To correct the disparity between Labour and Tory, transfer 6 seats from one to the other:

Tory 10,726,614 divided by 313 = 34,270
Labour 8,609,527 divided by 252 = 34,165

Note that the corresponding ratio for the LibDems is:

LibDem 6,836,824 divided by 57 = 119,944

and pro rata the LibDems are short of about 90 seats.

Fex Urbis

Kirsty and James both forget a big one. Unions running amoke, when you're bins aren't emptied and you have to struggle into work because of a tube strike, you'll get very peeved. And when your holiday is cancelled because Unite have downed tools you'll be feeling very unhappy. It will happen, it'll be just like the 70s. History always repeats.

Simon Stephenson

No one, of course, should be underestimated, and I agree that Labour will be a force to be reckoned with at the next general election - not for what they offer, but for what they pretend to offer.

But to my way of thinking, your prognosis of how we should approach the political engagement of the next few years is dismal. Whatever ones own political views, one must surely approach the future in a positive and constructive frame of mind. The key malaise of this country, and of other Western democracies, is that we have become too timid to engage in real politics. We've been tied up to a pole by the relativists until many of us have lost sight of the fact that progress is about pursuing likelihoods, not about refusing to do anything for which an argument can be made against it.

It is the left who have changed the rules of engagement by abandoning any allegiance to honesty, which released them from the necessity of having to go into contest with their ideology and intentions. By refusing to admit to what they are, they've made the battlefield short of a battle. But equally of concern is that they've been able to tweak the perception of what they are into just what's required to hoodwink the population into supporting them.

Unless those opposed to socialism do something to rekindle political contest, there's no hope for us as a nation of autonomous people. Within 25 years, living in the UK will be like hell on earth.

alexsandr

hes gonna be red ed for ever.
names like that never go away.
and if there is union trouble this winter he will have hellish split loyalties.
and lets not forget. labour is bankrupt. thats his other problem.

Dennis Churchill

Kirsty Richards
“5. James you are right to identify culture. The Conservative party have abandoned social conservatives. On some things Clegg/Cameron are to the left of Labour. Law and Order, Gay rights and may others.”
Yes the CINOs (Conservatives in name only) have taken the party over for now but as power looks like it might slip away...

TrevorsDen

Indeed, you have gone on too long Ms Kirsty.

The breakdown of the labour market has got nothing to do with anything. The big society is not a vote winning initiative one way or another. But its a social initiative - a counterpoint to the statist control of labour.

Why do you harp back to Thatchers day - the Tories aren't? That was over 30 years since she was elected. Its like Thatcher harping back to Atlee.

Believe it people do know what the deficit is. We face years of stringency - simple fact. The reason is the appalling economic shambles that is labour's legacy. You might believe it but I assure you labour cannot wish it away - it is a problem that faces all parties.

If EdM does not own up to Labours culpability then he will over the next 5 years get nowhere. Do not believe in any polls in the interim; polls only count close to the election.

Tiberius

"In other words, those suggesting that the next election is in the bag are being premature in the extreme. Ed Miliband is going to be a more formidable opponent than most Conservatives seem to have realised".

I assume you know you hold precisely the opposite point of view to your former editor, James, and I guess your current one does too.

I think if Ed is to have a chance of winning in 2015, he's got to use the remnant forces of the New Labour Geheimstaatspolizei to sabotage the admirable attempts by the Coalition to repair Brown's scorched earth. Labour just don't seem to have people with energy or ideas who could win the GE playing by Queensberry rules.

Scott Mills

RoY - it is called advertising, it is now a capitalist society works and help generate tax revenues for government. But of course you wouldn't understand that being a socialist. You won't rest until we are North Korea Mark 2. Go away you vile little man

Ed P

Mildred is the choice of the majority and has a mandate to lead Labour to victory in 2015.

No, sorry, I had a senior moment: Mildred will be a disaster and condemn Labour to three terms of opposition. Ah, that's better!

HD2

Culture and defence are still good attack lines.

The BBC is more Al Beeb than a mainstream neutral presenter of facts

The last Socialist lot wanted to all but abolish personal freedoms in the name of fictional anti-terrorist measures.

Let's face it, a bomb a day in London would have no direct effect on the lives of 60 million of us, so why should the remote possibility of a single bomb require the abolition of just about every freedom enshrines in Magna Carta?

That's as true about aircraft too - a bombed plane every month would have no impact on me nor on any decision I'd make to fly - so why are we letting the terrorists win all the time?

Pathetic response by the Labour Govt - life is about risks and death - if your life is safe, and comfortable, that's a bonus, not a right.

ollie

Does Red look like the next PM of this country? I don't so. Cameron looked and sounded the part from day one. I think maybe the speccie is OVERESTIMATING this lightweight.

Jeremy

"Positions that used to be hallmarks of the loony left in the 1980s are now mainstream and positively embraced by the Conservaitve party."

Oh? And which positions are those, then?

"The end of the Cold War also means that the national defence argument has lost much of its salience."

What about China - her self-perceived needs and ambitions? What about Russia, and hers? What about the United-bleedin'-States? We need to protect, preserve and enhance our independence from them all. And in order to do this, we will need a strong and robust army, air force and navy.

"Compounding this is the fact that the presence of the Lib Dems in the government means that the Conservatives aren’t going to take any robust positions on national security and terrorism that would open up clear blue water with Labour on these issues."

Apart from being the party of patriotism, the Tory Party is the party of individual liberty or it is nothing. I would expect a Tory government to dismantle the apparatus of state intrusion into the private life of the individual - the creation of which has surely been one of the hallmarks of the Labour years. The presence of the LibDems in government should enhance this process rather than detract from it.

Or have I missed your point?

Richard of York

@Scott
Why does it say "in association with"
thats not advertising.

TrevorsDen

Whats wrong with manufacturing arms? Provided we only pay a fair price for them.

RoY should stop his petty shooting the messenger tactics, the news is labour have to come up with policies and to do that they have to recognise reality not fantasy.

But labour are lucky - the deficit will be on its way out by the time of the next election.
Will they demonstrate competence not to create another one? What policy does RoY advocate that can accomplish that?

David Lindsay

They are still at it.

They are still talking about the brother who lost, in the way that Simon Cowell always paid more attention to Gareth Gates than to Will Young. They are still defining as "the centre ground" the demented attempt to re-stimulate the economy by putting yet more people out of work and by withdrawing yet more spending power, a scheme any deviation from which is termed "a lurch to the Left".

They are still calling the rich "Middle England" and "the middle classes"; Ed Balls told Jon Sopel that "the middle income is thirty thousand pounds", which should at least guarantee that he remains Shadow Education Secretary, at which he is good, rather than being moved to Shadow Chancellor, at which he would clearly be hopeless.

And they are still presenting trade union members as creatures from outer space, with those nurses and care workers, dustmen and bus drivers whose only political activity is the payment of the levy depicted as somehow less normal than the quite abnormal people, and I know of which I speak, whose hobby is local politics, or even than MPs, who have a thoroughly abnormal manner of life. David Aaronovitch told Andrew Marr that Britain should adopt something like American primaries. He had a point. But at present, the affiliated organisations section of Labour's Electoral College is by far the nearest thing to that. Ed, not David, Miliband won it.

The Squeezed Middle? We certainly are.

Tim Avenell

“He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind”.

Yes, I think that applies to Ed…he shall inherit the wind.

In other words, not only has he cynically seduced the Unions to usurp the better claims of his brother over the wishes of the members and Labour MPs he now has to unite a party that was hardly inspired by his leaden victory speech. He looked surprised at the result, like a rabbit caught in the headlights of an oncoming car.He might be bright but has the charisma of a dead sheep.

Cameron and Clegg I suspect can hardly believe their luck at the stupidity of Labour now destined to be out of power for at least 10 years now there is the Unions’ stooge as Leader.

Simon Stephenson

Trevors Den : 10.25pm

"But labour are lucky - the deficit will be on its way out by the time of the next election. Will they demonstrate competence not to create another one?"

They might demonstrate this competence, but never in a million years will they actually possess it. Labour economics is about pretending that pipedreams can be made into reality, in just the same way that 5-year-old children are led to think that Santa Claus is able to grant their every wish. Permanent systematic imprudence, which is inevitable from people with this in their belief system, will always drain the tank faster than it can be topped up.

Surely we've had enough Labour governments to avoid being deceived by the claim "this time it's different", however enticingly this claim is dressed up?

Frank P

It is impossible to underestimate the uckingfe untce. A mere front man for a bunch of union commie subversives. Great! They could have chosen someone with cunning and charisma. As it is they've shown their hand and picked an uppity derivative - a throwback, a boy man; somebody they can manipulate.

What you need to address is how this dysfunctional coalition is going to be knocked into shape. A fleet of Kuwaiti tankers if ever there was one.

Ali C

Kirsty - Mumsnet? I don't ***ing think so. Women have more brains that to 'listen' to patronising crap like that. And Harman and Evette?
Passd the bucket. Spelling affected by nausea.

JohnAnt

Look, first of all, the Conservative Party doesn't have the next election in the bag for the very simple reason that it cannot command a majority in the country. Conservatives don't trust the Daveocracy, and won't vote for it next time round, and the cities have been systematically turned into Labour machines - vote at 18, student and immigrant vote (often multiplied by several times, of course, particularly if postal) benefits-stuffed high-rises, aggressive 'anti-social' ethnic cleansing, and Labour agitprop-mag-stuffed-through-door drip-drip etc.
Labour knew what they were doing and did it quite cleverly.
But Ed - if he ever does turn himself into the family capo di capi - still has to develop a political narrative that goes beyond his lovely big eyelids and his nice brown multiracial colouring. Maybe he will.

2069: [From the London desk of the New York & New Europe Times] "Centenarian Edward Milliband let it be known how very pleased he was that his party, the People's Homeland Security and Northern Ireland Benefits Party, had won the local honorary EU (UK branch) election in coalition with the LibDem Lambeth Walk and Solihull Friends of Big Oil Party. Mr Milliband, speaking from the balcony at 10 Downing Street, said that he knew it was a terribly important occasion, although he had forgotten why he'd come up here in the first place."

JohnAnt

And isn't it time to put a stop to this endless posting about the hapless new leader of the Labour Party and his manipulated election by the trades unions?
That's enough Ed, ed.

Simon Stephenson

David Lindsay : 10.53pm

"They are still defining as "the centre ground" the demented attempt to re-stimulate the economy by putting yet more people out of work and by withdrawing yet more spending power, a scheme any deviation from which is termed "a lurch to the Left"."

The burden of proof, Mr Lindsay, is with you. You show that there is a better way to maximise aggregate demand than by the "demented" attempt to give us a breathing space of low interest rates and available finance, by reassuring our external creditors that, under this government, debt default is an unpardonable sin. In contrast to Mr Brown's administration, where it was fast becoming impossible to reach the same conclusion. You show us the process that ensures greater fiscal stimulus doesn't just find its way into greater public saving. You show us how to convince the public to spend more when government continues to leak money as through a sieve.

No one can say what will happen over the next few years, so I don't see how you consider yourself justified in describing the coalition policy as "demented" - unless, of course, you'ld been able to confirm your view by being given access to Tony Blair's hotline to God.

One thing though. The people who are so adamant that more borrowing/spending is what's needed now, they're very largely the same ones who were so gung-ho about the borrowing/spending that led to the credit crunch. So did they make a mistake, or were they trying to fxxx us up deliberately? Or were they just trying to foist upon us an upward sea-change in levels of public spending that we'd find it impracticable to reverse? And what, in reality, are they trying to achieve now?

maddy1

We are a bonkers, gullible Nation and we need to live with the fact. He is already talking about the "middle way" remarkably like Blair's third way,and our National Debt is like the Milky Way!

normanc

Ed is a blank page for most of the electorate. Forget what he has said in the past, if anything it shows a good political grasp that he has managed to go from outsider to leader in 2 months.

If Cameron couldn't beat Brown in the depths of recession Labour supporters shouldn't be losing much sleep over this result. A united Labour Party, the only opposition Party, is going to hoover up votes in any by-elections and have all the momentum behind them. CCHQ would be foolish (and I'm sure they're not) to be breathing a sigh of relief.

TomTom

"Women are a big problem for the coalition as Labour have the likes of Yvette Cooper and Harman who, say what you like about them, know how to talk to the mumsnet/ordinary women vote"

Must be in The Home Counties because in Northern England most women appear to loathe women politicians s self-serving harpies. Ed Miliband is a plasticine man who has seen nothing of the wider world. For all his faults Cameron is a man of stature compared to Miliband.

Incumbency is Cameron's big advantage and if the LibDems split Clegg knows where his bread is buttered and can let the Evan Harris crowd go mix it with Miliband in Oblivion.

TrevorsDen

Dear norman,
Labour lost more seats than virtually any time in their history. The Tories won ditto. Tories currently are polling more than their election level.

Rest assured if the very worst comes to the very worst the Tories will put the country to rights by the next election so that labour can ruin it again.

Mr Stephenson - my remark was to RoY - the onus is on him if he can to come up with policies to eliminate the deficit and keep it reduced. Simply talking about a 'double dip' is a smokescreen.

Richard of York

@Trevor
The onus is not on me or anyone else other than the govt to explain how they will deal with the deficit. They are in govt now they can't keep asking for help everytime the heat is turned up.
Labour set out their plan at the election and all the respected bodies said it was credible, halving it over 4 years. The markets endorsed it as with IFS OECD CBI FT etc.
Important to note that never has any Labour politician said they would not tackle the deficit the only dispute has been on how much, when and where to make the cuts.
Oik has said he will take the Labour plan and double the reduction in half the time.
Someone should tell him this is not a game of top trumps.
To those on the outside and not involved it looks like punishment for the people who voted Labour for 13 years and is all about ideology not necessity.
This six month posturing and doomsday menatality over the cuts has been very damaging. I suspect that after all the hype very little will actually happen this year.
All the warnings and the statistics must be getting through to the treasury and they will start very slowly.
I have a fundemental problem with the notion of creating 2.5 million jobs in the private sector especially when it looks like these private jobs are likely to be public jobs transfered out. The country needs wealth creating jobs not a time to play shops with the tax receipts.
Any jobs created must be bringing new money into the economy not a shuffle of the money already in the system.
What is the current Tory policy on wealth creating jobs? anyone know?

Verityred

Hi Dickie Dork,

Enjoying your latest contortionist incarnation as the Union's poodle's poodle? Your masters will be pleased.

Paul Hawkins

Richard of York -did you actually undertsand what was happening during Brown's administration?

SUSAN HILL

Sound point indeed about women working and no time for the Big Society. There are 2 seats on the local council in the small market town near me, 3 on our Parish council. Older people who sat have died or become frail, or moved to be nearer family in their last years. Newcomers are either working or don`t want to know. The scouts, guides, cubs, sports clubs all struggle for lack of people to lead/help out. Only the WI thrives.
People may vaguely feel willing but if you have 3 children, a job, and want to have some sort of family /social life you just are not prepared to give voluntary time to anything other than the twice a year cake-bake for the school fete and bazaar. And often the cake is bought from M and S.
Cameron should know all this. He doesn`t appear to.

Richard of York

Hi Verityred
where have you been?
Toilling away at your chores no doubt.
Well lass trust me a watched cauldron never boils....take a break and come back to the fold. Happy posting and please tell my why you disagree with my comment on real new jobs and new injection of real money into the economy.

Damaine

Not to be pedantic, but you spelt 'Conservative' wrong.

Occasional Ostrich

@Paddy

Yes, they will. In five years' time today's 13 year olds will have the vote, having heard only the Labour "It doesn't have to be as tough as this." siren songs presently being orchestrated. Unless the Conservatives can produce better, more attractive ones by then.

Simon Stephenson

Richard of York : 8.30am

Complete and utter balls from beginning to end, based on a Nirvana Fallacy that argues that because existing policy doesn't promise perfect outcomes, it must be inferior to your policy, which does.

Par for the course, students' union logic from you, I'm afraid. Playground strutting, with bigger words.

Richard of York

@Simple
And your argument IS?

cuffleyburgers

Why do you people continue to address postings @ Richard of York?

The guy's obviously a labour troll, and as such is politically so far up his own arse that he won't ever admit your are correct.

Insults just excite him and I am sure you have better ways to spend your time than exchanging playground insults with someone whose entire "political philosophy" consists of just such material.

You would achieve more by ignoring him.

normanc

Hi Trevor,
I realise the election wasn't a total disaster for the Conservatives, at least we have a Conservative government and not Labour or a Lab-Lib coalition (with Vince Cable as Business Secretary! Oh, wait...)

My worry is where are the new Conservative voters going to come from for the next election? It's conceivable that a lot of Lib Dems could vote Labour, a lot of conservatives who held their nose and voted 'Brown Out' may stay at home or go UKIP, especially if the coaltion choose to ignore Europe and allow further transfers of power (seems no other choice). The Lib Dems who may switch Tory will instead feel the need to buttress their own Party.

I fear that without a clear conservative message (for fear of being tagged nasty)that there really isn't much more to gain over what we already have.

As an aside John Redwood has a sublime post today that's worth a read setting out what I believe every coalition politician should be saying.

Simon Stephenson

Richard of York : 11.10am

see 1.06am on this thread.

Richard of York

Simple
thanks reread it and nothing has changed I am still right.

Pramston

Anyone who understands how the political fortunes of the two main parties have played out since 1992 will understand that this idiot is odds on to be the next PM. The pain hasn't really started yet, and when it does people will have short memories and scant regard for the true causes - they'll just want to blame the politicians in front of them. Through luck or judgement Labour has lost the right election and will be back soon, the nation however is unlikely to survive another Labour government.

Simon Stephenson

Richard of York : 12.41pm

"thanks reread it and nothing has changed I am still right."

In your mind you'ld still be right even as the last few items of national wealth were pawned on the international market to pay the salaries of the diversity officers and the equality steering committees, and the wealth producers started to die of cold and starvation, as Weimar level inflation destroyed the market from which they hitherto had extracted their means of survival. So don't think I wrote the comment for you.

Thanks for the thanks, by the way. First time, I think, although I may be wrong (unlike you).

Richard of York

Simple

Now Now!
You are not reading my posts try the one about real money in the economy and real wealth creation....I would put up a link but to be brutally honest I can't be ar**d.
All the time you try and paint me as Lenin I will paint you as one of Doddies Diddy men with the same aversion to tax.
OK?

Paddy

Simon Stephenson 7.59:

Agree entirely.

Simon Stephenson

Richard of York

Real money and real wealth creation? I have no recollection of anything worthwhile you've had to say about these.

I was sufficiently ar--d to spend the best part of an hour this morning locating the tax avoidance links, but if you can't be bothered to do the same here .......

Chuck Unsworth

@ Cufleyburgers

Exactly. Perhaps the troll ought to be ignored.

Massiveheado

I don't consider myself a troll but this is my first visit to the speccie site and I've found stuff like this - 'a bombed plane every month would have no impact on me nor on any decision I'd make to fly' - I know Tories are all about individual freedoms over collective responsibility but I didn't expect to find quite so many dimwitted Clarkson types. As far the political crystal ball gazing goes it's really quite simple. Osbourne's policies must lead to economic growth in this parliament, if they lead to deeper recession on top of cuts to to public services then 1992 will remain the last election to be won by the Conservatives for a long time as the following Lib/Lab pact minus Clegg will be incredibly hard to shift, especially when they ditch FPTP. If the working women of the South East don't see success from Osbourne's policies by 2015 then it's the history books for the Conservative movement. The Tories certainly shouldn't rely on Unions giving Red Ed a bad rep, it just might not happen, even for those of us that agree with cuts won't object to striking Nurses and hopefully someone will drop the RMT down a deep hole. If however, Osbourne's policies do work and the economy picks up, no-one's upset by the cuts to the bloated public sector and the growing private sector picks up all the slack and no long term damage is done, then he will be revered as an economic genius of the right and the Tories will win a landslide victory next time round. I suspect though that many Tories will look back and wish he'd presented the first £71 billion of cuts as Darlings idea (they were) and said that having looked at the books he's had to add an extra £14 billion or so... £85 billion is far more palatable than £113 billion and people would still blame Labour. Taking the spending review cuts to over £100 billion makes them his own, and if it doesn't work it'll be his fault, I've a feeling he'll regret not hedging his bets. Let's hope he doesn't, for all our sakes...

Simon Stephenson

Alternatively, Massiveheado (1.02am), one could look at from the point of view that the previous government's long-term objective was to impose, against the general will, a state of affairs in which high-tax, high-spend became practicably ineradicable. And that the first stage in the process of achieving this intention was to destabilise the monetary and fiscal balance so badly that a 5 year parliament was too short a time for any "enemy" government to repair the damage sufficiently to be able to resume the sort of normal service that normal people want.

What do you think of this as an explanation? How should we look at Labour if it is true? As Macchiavelli-smart? Or as a bunch of evil bar stewards who should have ben put down a well at birth?

pwilson

not worried about ed not being married but a man who can't find the time to sign his child's birth certificate ... that is a worry... how he going to fit it in now. Think it shows a man's priorities and that a real concern when we talking about family values etc.... what a cop out

PHIL WATSON

David Cameron must be feeling really good. The labour party have not got a chance with this man in charge. Basically he has absolutely no charisma and comes across as a bit of a drip.