I had not rated Ed Miliband particularly. He seemed dull. He didn’t make me feel anger, annoyance, inspired, optimistic – I just felt a general sense of apathy. Sure, he said some things that were good, but it was always felt like it was on a bandwagon (Ed. – Don’t worry, I’m not defecting). However, his speech was interesting. I would recommend reading it.
Ed painted the picture of where we had come from post the Great Depression.Talking about the rebalance of the settlement after a major politco-economical event. Ed believes we are this sort of turning point again and I won’t disagree with that.
The three conditions for change are as follows: the breakdown of consent for the current settlement; ideas which can form the basis of the new settlement; a political coalition to make it happen.
All in all, right (but a tad obvious?). Ed detoured into a mini political history lecture, but then returned to the modern day. According to Ed, there are now three challenges we must face: squeezed income; working people taking on more risk; intergenerational regression.
A strong sense of responsibility is something Ed is very passionate about.
Ed eventually is an intellectual. An interesting political thinker, sure. I am, however, not convinced he is a leader. The challenges he lays out, he didn’t lay out complete solutions for them. That’s fair enough. Labour are still going through their policy review, but bankers’ bonus tax & reforming welfare are only partial solutions to generating fairness in society.
I also find his complaining about energy companies very insincere. This is someone who was Energy Secretary for 3 years; it sounds like he didn’t do anything.
In questions, he was attacked mainly from the left. I don’t remember there being any ‘right wing’ questions. However, he made some interesting remarks, including support for International Aid & “We are a far too centralised society”.