Ed Balls slams Coalition with alternative approach to cuts


12:29 am - August 27th 2010

by Sunny Hundal    


      Share on Tumblr

In a keynote speech today (Friday) Ed Balls will say Labour needs to urgently make the case for a credible economic alternative to the coalition’s “deflationary cuts” which risk a double-dip recession.

In his speech – which is being held at Bloomberg, where ten days ago George Osborne accused Labour of being ‘deficit deniers’ – Ed Balls will accuse David Cameron and George Osborne of being “growth deniers”.

He will say that Labour must challenge the current consensus that there is no alternative. It is a strong speech – and exactly the narrative we need to be hearing from Labour.


Here is the speech

“For all George Osborne’s talk of ‘deficit-deniers’ – where is the real denial in British politics at the moment?

“We have a Chancellor who believes that he can slash public spending, raise VAT and cut benefits – he can take billions out of the economy and billions more out of people’s pockets, he can directly cut thousands of public sector jobs and private sector contracts, and none of this will have any impact on unemployment or growth.

“Why? Because against all the evidence, both contemporary and historical, he argues the private sector will somehow rush to fill the void left by government and consumer spending, and become the driver of jobs and growth. This is ‘growth-denial’ on a grand scale.”

He will say that Labour must challenge the current consensus that there is no alternative:

“First, let me say why I think it is so important for me – and indeed every other candidate who seeks to lead the Opposition – to stand up now and challenge the current consensus that – however painful – there is no alternative to the Coalition’s austerity and cuts.

”The first lesson I draw from history is to be wary of any British economic policy-maker or media commentator who tells you that there is no alternative or that something has to be done because the markets demand it.

“Adopting the consensus view may be the easy and safe thing to do, but it does not make you right and, in the long-term, it does not make you credible.

“We must never be afraid to stand outside the consensus – and challenge the view of the Chancellor, the Treasury, even the Bank of England Governor – if we believe them to be wrong.

“But there is a second lesson too – which is also very pertinent at the present time for the Labour opposition and any candidate aspiring to be the next Labour leader: it’s not enough to be right if you don’t win the argument at the time.

“Up to now, this is Labour’s current predicament. Only last week the Guardian ICM poll reported public support for Coalition plans to cut the deficit.

“As the impact of deflation on jobs and the economy feeds through over the coming months, and the reality of the Government’s cuts programme, tax rises and benefit cuts begins to bite, I have no doubt that public opinion will become increasingly concerned.

“But, in my view, to sit back and wait for the pain to be felt is a huge trap for Labour. Because in the meantime, the clear strategy of the Coalition Government is to persuade the public both that there is no alternative, and that – however much George Osborne boasted of his own fiscal austerity before this audience – all their decisions are the fault of the previous government.

“In my view Labour cannot sit back and allow this to happen. Leadership is about changing and leading public opinion rather than being driven by it .That is why I say it is time for Labour to take on and win the argument with David Cameron, Nick Clegg, George Osborne and others who share their views.

“We need now to win the argument for an alternative economic plan that is rooted in economic history and analysis, as well as in Labour values and principles.

“Of course, we cannot win the argument for a credible alternative path for growth, jobs, continued recovery and the eventual reduction of the deficit without first setting out why I believe George Osborne and others have got it so fundamentally wrong. That is why it is vital that we show that the Tory cuts are not just unfair, but both unnecessary and economically-unsafe.”

Referring to George Osborne’s speech at Bloomberg last week he will say:

“I was in America when I read about the speech, travelling in a camper van across New England. And after seeing first hand the worried and increasingly pessimistic mood in the US – in the media and in conversation with friends – it jarred to read the British Chancellor saying he was “cautiously optimistic about the economic situation”.

“The prevailing attitude I saw in America was not optimism but fear. Every newspaper I read highlighted people’s worries about their business, their jobs or their home and the growing concerns of US policymakers and business leaders and financial analysts at the emerging signs of a double-dip recession – and not just any recession.

“They fear what Americans – especially on the Eastern seaboard – like to call a ‘Perfect Storm’. A perfect storm where continued de-leveraging by banks and the private sector meets premature fiscal retrenchment from governments and a drastic tightening of consumer spending… as tax rises, benefit cuts and rising unemployment hit home.

“And it is these fears – not just in the US but round the world – which in recent days have caused equity markets to fall sharply, bond markets to surge, well summed up by Wednesday’s Financial Times front page headline ‘Market jitters over growth’.

“This is a risky and dangerous time for the world economy. History teaches us that economic recovery following a large-scale financial crisis can be slow and stuttering.

“The world will be watching closely when Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke speaks this afternoon in Jackson Hole to see what message he sends about the future course US monetary policy and whether he can revive flagging confidence in the US recovery.

“Here in Britain we have seen, in recent days, MPC member Martin Weale warn of the risk of a double-dip recession as a result of the current fiscal tightening.

“But whether our economy continues to recover or slips back into sustained slow growth – or even recession again – is not just a concern for Treasury ministers and financial analysts.

“Whether our leaders make the right calls now on growth and jobs, the deficit, public spending and welfare reform will determine the future of our country for the next decade or more and shape the kind of society we want to be.

“I do believe we face a choice as a country – on the economy and the future of our public services and the welfare state… By ripping away the foundations of growth and jobs in Britain – David Cameron, Nick Clegg and George Osborne are not only leaving us badly-exposed to the new economic storm that is coming, but are undermining the very goals of market stability and deficit reduction which their policies are designed to achieve.”

Referring to the global financial crisis, Ed warns that George Osborne is set to “strip out the foundations of the house just as the hurricane is about to hit”:

“We came through that storm without seeing the spiralling rates of inflation, interest rates, unemployment and repossession which have accompanied previous British recessions.

“Not only that, but our actions led the world to follow suit, stopped the collapse of the banking system, and took us back from the brink of Depression.

“And the effects of our actions are clear to see from the data on jobs, growth and the public finances from the first half of this year, before George Osborne’s ‘Emergency Budget’.

“But rather than continue with a strategy that was working, George Osborne is doing the exact opposite. As the second storm looms on the horizon, everything he is doing is designed to suck money out of the economy and cut public investment, while his tax rises and benefit cuts will directly hit household finances at the worst possible time. It is the exact reverse of the policy which allowed Britain and the rest of the world to weather the first storm.

“George Osborne was fond of saying – wrongly – that the Labour government had failed to fix the roof while the sun was shining. What he is now doing is the equivalent of ripping out the foundations of the house just as the hurricane is about to hit.”

And he will argue that Labour must set out an alternative to the coalition’s austerity and cuts:

“So it is Labour’s responsibility to set out a clear plan for growth, a more sensible timetable for deficit reduction, and a robust explanation of why that will better support our economy and public finances.

“Even halving the deficit over four years represents comfortably the biggest and fastest cut in the deficit since the period after the Second World War, but without the peace dividend to fund it.

“In a recent article in the Financial Times, the historian Niall Ferguson writes: ‘People are nervous of world war-sized deficits when there isn’t a war to justify them.’ But this is precisely the case I made to Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling last year – we have just experienced the biggest global financial crisis in a century, an event as momentous in historical and financial terms as war, famine or plague.

“Our economies were saved from catastrophe only by government intervention to nationalise banks and to absorb huge financial liabilities from the private financial sector. To attempt to repair the damage of such an event and return the national debt to its previous level in juts a few years is not only dangerously incredible in the eyes of financial markets but places an intolerable burdens on current users of public services.

“Just think if Clement Attlee’s government at the end of the second world war had decided that the first priority was to reduce the debts built up during the second world war – there would have been no money to fund the creation of the NHS, no money to rebuild the railways and housing destroyed in the Blitz, no money to fund the expansion of the welfare state.

“All the things the Labour movement is proudest of about that post-war government would have been jettisoned.

“And why weren’t they? Because they recognised that when a country has been through an once-in-a-generation event like the Second World War – where the costs involved are a second thought next to equipping the armed forces and saving people’s lives, homes and freedom – then the government needs a once-in-a-generation approach to the resulting deficit: a slower, steadier pace of reduction which meant they could also fund the improvements in health, education and welfare that the post-war generation demanded and deserved.

“Instead, George Osborne not only wants to go further and faster than the post-war government in reducing the deficit, he is planning to go £40 billion further and faster this year than even Alistair Darling’s plans.

“So when George Osborne – and some in my own party – say that there is no alternative to their timetable and that anyone who disagrees is a deficit-denier, I say this: If it was possible for our post-war government to have the wisdom and foresight to recognise the benefits of a slower, steadier approach to reducing an even bigger deficit, then it does not behove you to close off all debate.

“That is why – on grounds of prosperity and fairness – I believe Labour does need a credible and medium-term plan to reduce the deficit and to reduce our level of national debt, but only once growth is fully secured and over a markedly longer period than George Osborne is currently planning.”
*********

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
Sunny Hundal is editor of LC. Also: on Twitter, at Pickled Politics and Guardian CIF.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: Blog ,Economy

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


Well Sunny, you know what I think of Ed Balls et al, but this is a brilliant speech. I reckon the leadership contenders should put on a united front over this, as I doubt it would harm their chances but would probably improve the public opinion of the Labour Party.

I think he should talk about the future though, and refer less to Labour averting disaster in 2008.

But the voices against the cuts are getting louder. Long may it continue…

Thank you for highlighting Ed Balls’ speech.

I so wish that the historical context he brings was more widely used.

We have been told a pack of lies about Britain’s past approaches to fiscal policy since WW2: this is a straight economics paper, not too abstruse.

http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn26.pdf

3. PotteGeorge W. Potter

Ah. So he doesn’t actually have an alternative then – he’s just talking about the need for one. Forgive me if I’m not breathless with excitement just because Balls has finally got round to saying what the left has been saying for months.

4. Sunder Katwala

The full text of the speech is now available online here, which is longer than the lengthy advance extract published on LibCon.
http://www.edballs4labour.org/blog/?p=907

It’s not a terrible speech.

But I do find the “lessons from history” tone of Balls a little nauseating; as anyone knows, there are infinite readings of ‘history’ and it takes a pig-headed idiot (or a Stalinist) to assume that he, or indeed she, knows best…

Also, I feel it is important that the leadership candidates (and the left in general) start to make the case more specifically, including some actual detail – drop the waffle, it achieves nothing.

Most economists have a view. Why a politician who was once an economic advisor should be crimed for expressing his while standing for Labour Leader pretty clear cut.

As the Spectator said, Ed Balls is the candidate the Tories fear.

Why so many of their trolls screech so loudly, often in favour of la divine Dianne.

If this is why Conservatives ‘fear’ Ed Balls, I would be quite worried about their idea of what is fear-inducing.

It is a good attack, but not nececssarily consistent. For a start, I can point out that he states he has returned from the US, a country still practicing the sort of government-led recovery he seems (and I stress seems, since I see no actual proposals) to be advocating and which was practiced under the previous government. He says that there seems to be a perfect storm developing there – so that sort of intervention is working really well?

Also, he claims he is using the lessons of history, but also claims the last recession was the worst for 100 years. I doubt the Great Depression was better than the last couple of years myself – many economies did not recover for years after. Whilst there may be measures which can justify his statement, it would be a brave man (or woman) who attempted to persuade the population that 2009 was worse than 1929.

Above all though, I’d read this piece as saying that Labour’s policies were right prior to the election (minus the bits about making cuts) and that this will be shown to be the case. Apart from the fact that if growth continues this will be a false prophecy (and therefore rather a risk), didn’t the electorate generally decide Labour’s policies (not just economically) were not for them? It is all very well to attack, but this is unfocussed, deliberately backwards looking and gives no idea of what the medium-term strategy for cuts he mentions should be. How is this helpful in giving Labour anything other than a backbone of blind and pointless opposition? There needs to be ideas, not just anger and confrontation.

Darling already made quite clear that Labour would not have cut so early or so deep, as Balls reiterates. Sorry mate you’re blethering.

Have I got his right…Balls’s dramatic alternative is…drumroll…a little less cutting a little later on?

OK.

That is obviously the datum.

How many hostages to the agreements which will be reached after this Leadership election would you like?

ROFLMA&SO!

Oh.. cjcjcj we Know you didn’t get to be asking silly questions but not asking silly questions … we Know you didn’t get to be asking silly questions but not asking silly questions …we Know you didn’t get to be asking silly questions but not asking silly questions

“As the Spectator said, Ed Balls is the candidate the Tories fear.”

I’m sure they’re just quaking in their boots.

I think that win or lose, perhaps even more so if he loses, Ed Milliband is the one to watch long term.

This is what the ONS actually said about the revised GDP estimate for the second quarter this year:
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=192

Note that GDP in the second quarter was up only 1.7% on the same period a year ago.

For non-partisan assessments of future risks:

“The ‘breakdown of GDP shows that the recovery is built on very fragile foundations,’ said Samuel Tombs, an economist at Capital Economics Ltd. in London. ‘Household and government spending did both post solid rises, but both sectors are very unlikely to maintain such growth rates as the fiscal squeeze kicks in over the coming quarters.’

“The Office for Budget Responsibility, the government’s new fiscal monitor, said last month that Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne’s spending cuts have increased the chance the UK may plunge back into recession. The measures will slice 85 billion pounds from expenditure, equivalent to 5.7 percent of GDP, according to Institute for Fiscal Studies estimates.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-27/u-k-expands-faster-than-estimated-on-growth-in-construction-inventories.html

“Aug 24 (Reuters) – Britain faces the risk of sliding into recession and the central bank’s growth forecast for this year and next may be too optimistic, a Bank of England policymaker was quoted as saying on Tuesday.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE67N00K20100824

Quietzapple,

Darling already made quite clear that Labour would not have cut so early or so deep, as Balls reiterates. Sorry mate you’re blethering.

Mr Darling made clear he would have cut next year, not this, whilst Mr Balls is being unspecific about when he thinks cuts should happen. He gives the impression of thinking cuts can only happen when growth is secured, which might be a policy, but was not that of the last Labour government at the time. Essentially, Mr Balls analysis is that cuts will only be necessary when growth is restored – which is a more extreme version of the policy that did not win Labour the last election.

And if that is the limit of your criticisms of my suggestions, I did pretty well really, since you’ve picked up on a sidebar rather than the main argument (the clue was that the relevant clause, as with this one, was in parantheses)…

Never mind the tribal games and the political spin, the tea leaves are not looking auspicious:

There is more to America’s stubbornly high unemployment rate than just weak demand
http://www.economist.com/node/16889105?story_id=16889105

A widening U.S. trade deficit has become a substantial drag on economic growth as the country’s exports struggle to keep pace with the swelling sums that Americans are again spending on imported goods.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/26/AR2010082606771.html

Euro weakens broadly on worries over eurozone economy – Aug 23
The single currency fell against dollar and the Japanese yen on Monday as investors worried over the strength of economic recovery in eurozone
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/45574/20100823/euro-weakens-broadly-on-worries-over-eurozone-economy-aug-23.htm

TOKYO (Dow Jones)–Japan’s economy minister said Friday that the country’s economy is still growing, but that negative influences are also on the rise.

“Recent strength in the yen and weakness in overseas economies are increasing the economy’s downside risk,” said Minister of State for Economic and Fiscal Policy Satoshi Arai at a regular press conference.

In response, the government has started to compile fresh economic stimulus measures–the details of which Prime Minister Naoto Kan is expected to disclose when he meets the press later in the day.
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100826-716870.html

News update Saturday:

“Bank of England Deputy Governor Charles Bean said more monetary stimulus may be required to sustain the recovery as the aftermath of the recession continues to hamper the economy.

“’The deleveraging process is incomplete, the recovery remains fragile and a considerable margin of spare capacity is yet to be worked off,’ Bean said in a speech at the Kansas City Fed’s annual symposium in Jackson Hole, Wyoming today. ‘Further policy action may yet be necessary to keep the recovery on track,’ but ‘normal times will surely return in due course.’

“Bank of England policy makers have split on the need for an additional spur as the government’s budget squeeze overshadows the economy’s acceleration in the second quarter. Governor Mervyn King said Aug. 11 growth will be weaker than previously forecast as the U.S. economy cools and a debt crisis threatens the euro area, Britain’s largest trading partner. ”
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-28/boe-s-bean-says-more-stimulus-may-be-needed-to-sustain-economic-recovery.html

For those interested, this is the text of Charles Bean’s paper on: Monetary Policy After the Fall, delivered at Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City Annual Conference on 28 August 2010
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/speeches/2010/speech444.pdf

Exerts from the report of the speech on the BBC website:

Later this year, the coalition government will unveil details of new powers for the Bank to try and head off any future crisis.

And Mr Bean used his speech to set out examples how these could underpin “macro-prudential policy” under the Financial Regulations Bill.

These included forcing banks to build up reserves in good times to help them weather downturns, and imposing restrictions on how much money mortgage lenders would provide.

“With an additional objective of managing credit growth and asset prices in order to avoid financial instability, one really wants another instrument that acts more directly on the source of the problem,” he said.

“That is what macro-prudential policy is all about.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11123774

““In a recent article in the Financial Times, the historian Niall Ferguson writes: ‘People are nervous of world war-sized deficits when there isn’t a war to justify them.’ But this is precisely the case I made to Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling last year – we have just experienced the biggest global financial crisis in a century, an event as momentous in historical and financial terms as war, famine or plague.”

Our budget deficit is ~ 11% of GDP, and will, according to the governments plans and spending cuts, still be 2-3% by 2015.

Germany’s budget deficit is ~ 4% of GDP and will, according to the governments plans and spending cuts, be 2-3% by 2012.

Why did this “global” event cost us three times as much as Germany?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iBHj6-nq40ytTE9Ld-K-07KiqTLwD9HPQ7RO1

@18: “Why did this “global” event cost us three times as much as Germany?”

For at least these reasons:-

1. Britain’s financial services industry is much larger than Germany’s – London contends with New York for the position of the world’s leading financial centre. The consequence is that the cost of bailing out failing banks in Britain was greater and more necessary to avert a systemic collapse of the global financial system.

2. As Meryn King, Governor of the Bank of England, put it in June last year:

Speaking to the House of Commons Treasury select committee, the governor of the Bank of England hit out at government’s tax plans.

“We came into crisis with fiscal policy that was not sustainable,” he said.

“The deficit at that point was not consistent. and required adjustment.”
http://www.myfinances.co.uk/cut-your-bills/news//mortgages/mortgage-interest-rates/king-fiscal-policy-before-crisis-unsustainable-$1306465.htm

Independent think-tanks and commentators were remarking on the fiscal black holes in Gordon Brown’s budgets as least as far back as 2001:

“Labour’s pledges to tackle poverty and drag Britain’s underfunded NHS up to European levels have opened up a £17bn black hole in the government’s finances that will have to be plugged by higher taxes, the UK’s leading financial experts said last night.

“The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), an independent thinktank, said it would cost the equivalent of 6p on the basic rate of income tax for Labour to match the average European Union health spending, introduce new tax breaks for the working poor and repair the damage to the public finances caused by economic slowdown.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2001/nov/29/uk.budget2002

3. These fiscal black holes were brushed over on the basis that Britain’s GDP was going to grow faster – resulting in more buoyant projected tax revenues – than GDP growth in fact turned out to be. In short, Treasury forecasts were over optimistic on GDP growth and tax revenues.

However, see this independent, non-partisan assessment by Martin Wolf in the FT:

“Can we not at least blame Mr Brown for the bloated public spending and grotesque fiscal deficits? Yes, but also only up to a point. Between 1999-2000 and 2007-08, the ratio of total managed spending to GDP did rise from 36.3 per cent to 41.1 per cent. But the latter was still modest, by the standards of the previous four decades. The jump to a ratio of 48.1 per cent, forecast for this year in the 2010 Budget, is due to the recession. Nominal spending is currently forecast at 3.5 per cent higher in 2010-11 than forecast in the 2008 Budget. But nominal GDP will be 10.3 per cent lower and tax revenues 16.4 per cent lower. Critics of his fiscal policies were right, but the error was far larger than anybody imagined. It is true, however, that Mr Brown must take a share of the blame for Labour’s failure to ensure the extra spending would be well managed.”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3074d7ba-5ec0-11df-af86-00144feab49a.html

For more analysis of the state of Britain’s fiscal affairs prior to the recent financial crisis, see this by the Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) in 2008:

The UK public finances: ready for recession? by Robert Chote and colleagues
http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn79.pdf

On explicit and implict claims about the superior fiscal rectitude of previous Conservative governments, note this passage:

“In 1996, the UK had the 3rd biggest structural deficit in the G7 and the 8th biggest of the 25 countries for which the OECD has data for that year.”


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Liberal Conspiracy

    Ed Balls slams Coalition with alternative approach to cuts http://bit.ly/9q27Bz

  2. sunny hundal

    Ed Balls' speech is published: http://bit.ly/9q27Bz – on this basis he's get my second vote.

  3. Leon Green

    RT @sunny_hundal: Ed Balls' speech is published: http://bit.ly/9q27Bz – on this basis he's get my second vote.

  4. Ed Balls' team

    RT @sunny_hundal: Ed Balls' speech is published: http://bit.ly/9q27Bz – on this basis he's get my second vote. << full text tmw morning

  5. Mehdi Hasan

    RT @sunny_hundal Ed Balls' speech is published: http://bit.ly/9q27Bz – on this basis he's get my second vote. >> Good decision.

  6. mark wright

    Ed Balls slams Coalition with alternative approach to cuts | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/Xw4LH8P via @libcon

  7. Lisa

    http://liberalconspiracy.org/2010/08/27/ed-balls-slams-coalition-with-alternative-approach-to-cuts/

  8. diana smith

    convincing speech by @edballsmp http://bit.ly/9q27Bz good to hear an alternative approach to economy clearly articulated.

  9. Ellie Mae

    RT @libcon: Ed Balls slams Coalition with alternative approach to cuts http://bit.ly/9q27Bz

  10. Robert Dale

    last read before bed –> RT @ns_mehdihasan: RT @sunny_hundal Ed Balls' speech is published: http://bit.ly/9q27Bz (cc @CharlyLewis )

  11. James Hepplestone

    RT @sunny_hundal: Ed Balls' speech is published: http://bit.ly/9q27Bz – on this basis he's get my second vote. < Mine too…

  12. Labour Matters

    RT @sunny_hundal Ed Balls' speech is published: http://bit.ly/9q27Bz – on this basis he's get my second vote

  13. Purplesmurf

    Ed Balls' speech is published: http://bit.ly/9q27Bz

  14. newleader

    http://www.edballs.tk RT @labourmatters RT @sunny_hundal Ed Balls' speech is published: http://bit.ly/9q27Bz – on this basis he's get my seco…

  15. newleader

    http://www.edballs.tk RT @PurplesmurfLLB Ed Balls' speech is published: http://bit.ly/9q27Bz

  16. earwicga

    Ed Balls slams Coalition with alternative approach to cuts | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/PSUWkXU via @libcon

  17. Anna

    Ed Balls talks 4 ages without actually saying much & slams Coalition without presenting an alternative approach to cuts http://t.co/PSUWkXU

  18. newleader

    http://www.edballs.tk RT @earwicga Ed Balls slams Coalition with alternative approach to cuts | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/PSUWkXU via @libcon

  19. Politics of UK

    Ed Balls slams Coalition with alternative approach to cuts #ukpolitics http://bit.ly/9yZG3H

  20. Conner C

    RT @politicsofuk: Ed Balls slams Coalition with alternative approach to cuts #ukpolitics http://bit.ly/9yZG3H

  21. Quietzapple

    RT @TeamEdB: RT @sunny_hundal: Ed Balls' speech is published: http://bit.ly/9q27Bz – on this basis he's get my second vote. << ful …

  22. George the CUT!

    Ed Balls writes this rubbish: http://liberalconspiracy.org/2010/08/27/ed-balls-slams-coalition-with-alternative-approach-to-cuts/

  23. George the CUT!

    Look @dannyalexander You're to tackle EdBalls head on. http://url.ie/7awk We need to rebalance the UK economy in favour of US, tell Him!

  24. Pucci Dellanno

    RT @libcon: Ed Balls slams Coalition with alternative approach to cuts http://bit.ly/9q27Bz

  25. Matthew Dear

    RT @sunny_hundal: Ed Balls' speech is published: http://bit.ly/9q27Bz – on this basis he's get my second vote.

  26. newleader

    http://www.edballs.tk RT @mdearo RT @sunny_hundal: Ed Balls' speech is published: http://bit.ly/9q27Bz – on this basis he's get my second vote.

  27. newleader

    http://www.edballs.tk RT @adpucci RT @libcon: Ed Balls slams Coalition with alternative approach to cuts http://bit.ly/9q27Bz

  28. Alex Naysmith

    RT @libcon: Ed Balls slams Coalition with alternative approach to cuts http://bit.ly/9q27Bz

  29. newleader

    http://www.edballs.tk RT @new_leader http://www.edballs.tk RT @mdearo RT @sunny_hundal: Ed Balls' speech is published: http://bit.ly/9q27Bz – on thi…

  30. MAppleby

    He's got my second vote too “@sunny_hundal: Ed Balls' speech is published: http://bit.ly/9q27Bz – on this basis he's get my second vote.”

  31. newleader

    http://www.edballs.tk RT @MAppleby87 He's got my second vote too “@sunny_hundal: Ed Balls' speech is published: http://bit.ly/9q27Bz – on thi…

  32. Andrew Ducker

    Ed Balls great speech about cuts http://bit.ly/bYjnKr

  33. tamsinchan

    Ed Balls slams Coalition with alternative approach to cuts | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/9t4hMeA via @libcon

  34. newleader

    http://www.edballs.tk RT @tamsinchan Ed Balls slams Coalition with alternative approach to cuts | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/9t4hMeA via …

  35. Raghav Suryadevara

    RT @tamsinchan: Ed Balls slams Coalition with alternative approach to cuts | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/9t4hMeA via @libcon

  36. Gary Naylor

    Ed Balls slams Coalition with alternative approach to cuts | Liberal Conspiracy http://t.co/RoIcmoI via @libcon. Why Osborne is so dangerous

  37. Are the two Eds aligning together on policy? | Liberal Conspiracy

    […] by Sunny Hundal     August 29, 2010 at 11:00 am I was impressed by Ed Balls’ speech last week on economic policies, where he stressed “there is an alternative” to the […]





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.