This was the question raised by today’s joint Balls Miliband press conference.
The two Eds are very different in both body language and temperament. Balls is the far more pugilistic politician, always looking to dispute the premises of a question and happy to use aggressive language. While Miliband is far more of a conciliator, looking to find consensus and using only gentle humour. They even stand at the lectern in different ways: Balls hunched over his, leaning into the fight. Miliband hanging back from his, and taking a gentle step towards it when answering a question.
The danger for Miliband is that Balls appears to be the alpha male, the one taking the fight to Labour’s enemies. The trick for Miliband will be to find a way to harness Balls’ aggressiveness. To portray Balls as the licensed attack dog while Miliband, the aspirant PM, stays above the fray.
In terms of the economic substance, it was more of the same from Balls — see Pete’s post. There was also a moment of sheer chutzpah from Balls when he declared that the job of the chancellor ‘is to anticipate unexpected events’ without any admission that Labour had left this country horribly exposed to a financial crisis by relying on one sector for an ever increasing proportion of tax revenues.
On AV, Miliband specifically blamed Clegg’s office for the collapse of a joint Miliband Charlie Kennedy event planned for this week. This referendum looks set to make relations between the Labour and Lib Dem leaderships even more rancorous.
Comments