Ed miliband

Miliband’s speech was meant to reach beyond the hall. “I aspire to be your Prime Minister,” he told country, “to fulfil the promise of Britain.” But, after an hour long speech, it is not wholly clear what the “promise of Britain” is. Miliband offered the hand of partnership to small businesses, the ordinary working family, those who want a cheap further education, working mothers, but it was not clear what they would obtain from the Labour leader. This was a speech virtually bereft of policy direction or a coherent theme. We have a clear idea of what and whom Miliband is against, but very little idea of what he is

Finally, a good idea from the Labour conference. In his speech tomorrow, Ed Miliband will say he’d give workers priority over the jobless for social housing. This is the dividing line he was reluctant to draw when asked to by Andrew Marr on Sunday. It’s a clever move, and one that recognises the resentment felt by the strivers against the welfare dependent. He will say: “The hard truth is that we still have a system where reward for work is not high enough, where benefits are too easy to come by for those who abuse the system.” So councils dolling out housing should not only take need into account, but

David Miliband was studiously loyal to his brother in his one speaking appearance at Labour conference. He told Movement for Change, the community organising group that he founded, that ‘Ed deserves huge praise’, that ‘Ed has led with purpose and conviction and that ‘we’ll all here because we want to put Ed into Downing Street’ But the brother over the water did come with three warning for Labour. The first was that ‘if Labour becomes a sectional party, we’ll never be elected to government.’ The second was that there’s ‘never been more distrust of the state across the industrialised world’ so if Labour becomes ‘a big state party, we’ll never

The Labour conference has started badly for Ed Miliband, with David Blunkett criticising the party for allowing the Tories to define the national economic debate. Blunkett was concurring with shadow foreign secretary Douglas Alexander’s view that the Tories had been successful in “framing a public language that made more sense of the economic crisis”. To be fair to Miliband, he made the same point in his recent interview with the New Statesman, but he is yet to provide a coherent or credible alternative to the government’s policies. So, inquiring eyes turn on Ed Balls (and today’s Mail relates another alleged tale of his part in our economic downfall). The shadow

There is a strange pre-Lehman feeling in the air right now: the idea that something awful is going to happen, but no one knows what or when. This is laden with political ramifications. The problem for the Tories last time was not that George Osborne had been caught aboard HMS Deripaska. The greater problem was that a crash had arrived and the Shadow Chancellor had nothing to say. Brown, at least, seemed to have an agenda, and the Tory poll lead was reduced to one vulnerable point. I admire Osborne, but he can do far better in making the case for the government’s economic strategy. If there is a second