Actually, while I’m on Balls, a thought occurs. The briefing was designed as a platform from which to attack Tory education policy. I wonder:

1. Doesn’t calling a briefing simply to oppose the opposition’s policy, rather than state your own, look panicked? If Adonis, Balls and Knight really were there to attack the Tories and not defend themselves, they really do look as if they’ve conceded that they’re no longer setting the agenda. Which is just the message Brown wants to be sending now, I’m sure…

2. How did Balls ever let it get away from education? He branched out from that theoretical topic onto Crewe, the 10p tax rate and, of course, Frank Field - completely blotting out any mention of education policy in the press. Notice that the BBC article is entitled, “Ministers attack Rebel MP Field,” and not, “Ministers attack Tories.”

Really, for Balls to attack Field for masking the agenda with personal attacks seems ridiculous in the extreme following that.

If it weren’t for the close alliance between Brown and Balls, I’d ask how much longer the latter can last…

A vision came to me last night: Ed Balls is a Tory in disguise, desperately fanning the flames of factionalism in the Labour Party.  As is Charles Clarke, as is Jack Straw, as is Brown himself for remaining leader.

Clearly

What I mean to say is the latest act in the PLP’s grim waltz to electoral suicide continued this morning.  For those that haven’t heard, Ed Balls issued a stinging (hah…) attack on opponents today, calling for an end to personal attacks in the party.

Before claiming Frank Field’s behaviour cast doubts over whether his, “intentions were honourable,” in attacking Brown.  This after calling not too long ago for personal attacks to stop.

Yes, I can see it too.  The public just love hypocrisy.  And backbenchers - who the government needs to win over if it’s to survive - are really crazy about confrontational ministerial behaviour.

Chyeah…

Field’s comments yesterday weren’t helpful to Brown or the Labour Party.  They sank a raft of policy announcements in a tide of personal effluence which might otherwise have provided a vaguely fresh start for the goverment.  Balls is justifiably irritated - along, so the tale goes, with a fair number of backbenchers.

Couldn’t one of them be found to attack Field?  If that’d happened, the criticism would have looked genuine.  Field might have been toppled from his spot as backbench-blocker-in-chief - which was an odd place for him to be anyway.  Divisions between backbenchers and ministers would have been reduced, and those policies might somehow have made it to the news.

Instead - Balls makes this impromptu briefing.  As Gordon Brown’s close friend and ally, his reaction looks like a personal continuation of the previous rancour.  The backbenchers see their self-appointed awdward squaddrista attacked by a minister, and rally round to stop the bullying.  Divisions reappear.  Those policies disappear entirely, aren’t properly scrutinised and unexpectedly bite the party in the arse next year.  Balls looks bitter; the party looks divided; and it all looks very weak to the public.

Strategic mistake, mayhaps?  However you regard Balls as a minister, it’s impossible not to lament the damage he seems intent on wrecking within the party.  He should learn to stop willy-waving, as it just doesn’t work someone in his position…

Note to self: Stop making jokes about Balls’ name.  Immature and puerile, and looks silly.  If not as much as the Minister for Children does at present…

Some might find the following offensive.  And rightly so.

(more…)

One of his better slashings.

As ever, some light editing would make a fine article great, for instance

To them, “the central state shifting money around” hasn’t dealt with “the symptoms” of poverty; it has ended their poverty.

Should be:

To them, “the central state shifting money around” hasn’t dealt with “the symptoms” of poverty; it has ended it.

But the points he makes are fine ones. Hopefully there will be more ones along these lines now that Cameron is verging upon unstoppable and the Right are acting rather like Obama supporters, just with less cause. I still doubt he can be stopped by this stage, or rather not by somebody who seems determined to annoy everyone who would consider voting for him {die-hard socialists? 10 tax rate! The young liberal crowd? Reclassify cannabis!} in a desperate and utterly disingenious lunge for the Daily Mail readership, who are already thoroughly enamoured with the genuine electable Tory they’ve been longing for for so long.

Still, the prospect of Cameron passing himself off as progressive is preposterous and I hope that more of an effort is made to expose it. For as long as John Redwood is in charge of anything important it’s a blatant lie.

Now if only we could get Milliband some courage…