Will Balls and Cooper capitalise from Johnson's mistakes?
Peter Hoskin 9:07am
You've probably heard about Alan Johnson's latest slip-up yesterday. But it's still worth highlighting the response made by a Labour
spokesman – as Dizzy has – because it's simply extraordinary. Here it is:
Extraordinary that Labour should already have to make excuses on behalf of Johnson. But even more extraordinary that they should be made in this manner. The shadow chancellor errs, in quick succession, over when his party would cut the deficit by; their policy on national insurance; whether VAT is levied on food; and, now, the employers' rate of national insurance – and one of his colleagues describes expectations that he should know his brief as "a Westminster quiz game"? At a time when the economy is the topic du jour, this is a "game" they really might care to learn the rules for."We have a Shadow Chancellor who lives in the real world. He knows the difference between a progresive and regressive tax. He knows what it takes to get on in the real world. That is more important than taking part in a Westminster quiz game."
I say this as someone who thought that Ed Miliband made an alright decision in appointing Johnson as shadow chancellor. Not so much for the man himself – although he is a politician of rare charm – but for what it said about Labour's fiscal policy. Picking Johnson was a way of rejecting what was effectively the No Cuts approach espoused by Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper. It committed Labour, more or less, to the more sensible Darling plan for the reducing the deficit over this Parliament. As symbolic measures go, it was an important one.
But what now? If Johnson carries on as he has started, then it can only fuel the bonfire that is collecting around his feet. And there aren't too many more "instinctive cutters" to take his place: Liam Byrne, perhaps, or – another act to the family drama – David Miliband. Which makes you wonder whether Miliband would be able to reject Balls and Cooper – both strong performers in the shadow cabinet elections – a second time around. Either might be more coherent, and more sure of themselves, than Johnson. But here's the rub: they would pull Labour's fiscal policy, and the overall political debate, into even more questionable territory.
Previous
Sir Graphus
January 10th, 2011 10:07am Report this commentHe's only the SHADOW chancellor. Important point, this. No-one expects him to be the actual chancellor. Everyone knows he's not up to that job.
The actual chancellor will be Balls or Cooper, and everyone knows it. Johnson was appointed because Milliband could not, for understandable reasons, make an enemy of Balls so early in his leadership. Also, Johnson was appointed to represent the man in the streets, and is job is to protest against govt cuts, and try to avoid doing anything else.
Victor Southern
January 10th, 2011 10:19am Report this commentYou assume that there is something which could be called a progressive tax. If you mean a tax which becomes progressively higher then I consider that to be one that damages the national economy.
If you mean ever-increasing fuel taxes then I consider them to be damaging to the national economy.
If you mean taxes aimed at discouraging wealth production then, once again, I consider them to be equally damaging.
Sally Chatterjee
January 10th, 2011 10:27am Report this commentI'm not sure we all know the rates in question but if you are going to promote raising these rates in question, it might help if you know what's going on. It's not a "quiz", it's public policy.
Slim Jim
January 10th, 2011 10:34am Report this commentAt least Labour are being consistent. They have always appeared to have someone in the post of chancellor (shadow or otherwise) who has the same grasp of economics as a minor invertebrate. The 'real world'? Where's that then?
Pettros
January 10th, 2011 10:57am Report this commentBad news for coalitionists if Johnson goes. I get the imprsession Cooper would do her homework a lot more thoroughly! Plus I reckon she or Ed B are absolutely champing at the bit to get stuck into Osbourne.
BigAl
January 10th, 2011 11:10am Report this commentNo mention of the gaffe on the Biased Broadcasting Corporation. Just the usual wall to wall government cuts.
wrinkled weasel
January 10th, 2011 11:21am Report this commentMr Johnson is really just another in a long line of people who are their because their face fits and they say the right things (mostly). I saw his performance on Sky with Dermot Murnaghan and it was not just the quiz element that defeated him (as indeed was the case with poor David (Mastermind) Lammie, it was the obvious fact that he was reciting lines from a briefing sheet.
You have to remember that New Labour has to have at least one pleb in the ranks - John Prescott is no more - in order to maintain the flimsy illusion that they are a party of people who once did proper jobs.
Johnson is Labour's token pleb. He's been seen recently eating Saveloys.
Or is that, eating at the Savoy?
Chris lancashire
January 10th, 2011 11:45am Report this commentI am very much afraid the repulsive couple will capitalise on Johnson's weaknesses. Sure as hell, they'll have been plotting ever since Milliband humiliated Balls in the leadership election.
Problem is I can't decide whether it is worth suffering either of these two as Shadow Chancellor for 4 years in order to expose their infantile ballsonomics.
TrevorsDen
January 10th, 2011 1:20pm Report this comment'will be Balls or Cooper ...'. Lets hope 'could be ...'
The prospect of either of these two being allowed near our economy ought to concentrate minds.
Both hope against hope of course that the coalition will have rescued the economy by the time they are bidding for the job.
Marbury
January 10th, 2011 2:02pm Report this commentAn uncharacteristic outburst of pomposity.
It's not 'extraordinary'. It's a perfectly 'ordinary' ie predictable defence, exactly you'd expect. It's also common sense.
Sir Everard Digby
January 10th, 2011 2:33pm Report this commenta couple of words missing from Johnson's job title. Insert 'of a' between Shadow and Chancellor to give a more accurate description.
As for Calls and Booper - They got where they are solely by the patronage of others but it seems both are under the delusion that their positions have been arrived at as a result of ability. Their constant attempts to convince us of this have achieved the opposite result. Every utterance they make serves only to underline how inept both are.
Surely there is no-one so bad that they are worthy of replacement by either?
2trueblue
January 10th, 2011 2:47pm Report this commentAmazing that Balls/Cooper got away with all that house flipping and running off with our money. They are odious and can you imagine how 'So what' would do?
Boudicca
January 10th, 2011 4:47pm Report this commentI can't believe you are suggesting Liam Byrne 'There is no money left - Good luck' as a possible replacement.
He'd never be allowed to forget that note.
And I can't see big bro' David stepping in to save his brother's bacon. Far more likely to wait in the shadows laughing along to himself, and wait for his kid bro's incompetence to become ever more apparent.
treborc
January 11th, 2011 8:23am Report this commentI knew NI was 12.5 now 12.8% I also knew VAT was not on food baby clothes or childrens if you like.
You expect the bloody bloke to know this, problem is these are real new labour types they are not really into the opposition role yet, give them twenty or thirty years out of power they will learn
Back to top