About time as well, I thought he was going to be the bloke who had no views on anything. Sadly even I have no idea why people are living in tents out side St Paul’s, because talking to them on TV it seems some are on holiday.

Unfortunately the protest is increasingly being taken over by drunks and druggies. I’m not a supporter of the protesters but I think it’s a pity that they’re being infiltrated by a load of complete d***heads.

“Ed Mili endorses aims of #occupyLSX”

Uh, no.

He calls the demands a “a long list of diverse and often impractical proposals.”

So not exactly an endorsement of their aims.

And as one of those far-left usual suspects who committed the cardinal sin of criticising Ed, I should just add that whilst I’m critical of him, I am glad Ed’s said what he has. It shifts the public dialogue from ‘ the protesters are stupid’ to ‘they have a point’.

That can only be a good thing. It’s progress, but we’re not there yet.

Where, oh where to begin?

…the biggest issue of our time: “the gap between their values and the way our country is run”.

Which has been the issue since about 1980. At least.

“When people at the top show such irresponsibility, it should be not be a surprise to find it elsewhere in society too.”

So when the next lot of student (and other) protestors find themselves kettled, beaten, fitted up and sentenced to prospect-destroying terms of imprisonment by a politicised, feral judiciary, will we hear a peep from you condemning that? Or will you wait to see what Dacre, Mohan and the focus groups are saying? Or will you just cheer it on as before?

“Business as usual is not an option.”

Funny, it was for you when you were in office. All New Labour did was continue the genuflection to those same sociopathic elements who have tanked our economy (and just about everyone else’s), and added a vicious overlay of social authoritarianism to it.

“In every generation, there comes a moment when the existing way of doing things is challenged. It happened [...] again in 1997.”

No it bloody didn’t. All your party of corporate fluffers did was to ameliorate some minor aspects of the worst effects of globalised finance by subsidising cheapjack employers with public money (the ‘tax credits’ system).

“But we can only win this debate with a movement which stretches beyond politics.”

So long as the dead-hand of your party is kept away from it, it has a chance. If you and the front-men of (most) of the unions get your maulers on it, it is doomed.
Politics does not exist for politicians; it exists for us. The Occupy people and those in other, similar campaigns recognise that. Your and your class don’t want to acknowledge that.

Shorter Ed Milliband and Labour Party:

Slow-witted, cowardly and opportunistic.

@2:

“Unfortunately the protest is increasingly being taken over by drunks and druggies.”

Cite? And from reputable sources only, please.

4 – please define reputable.

2 sources: 1. It was in an article in the Telegraph I read last week. I’m aware that the Telegraph has an agenda of its own but that doesn’t automatically make its reports void.

2. Personal observations from popping down there last week. Amongst the protesters there were some people who looked frankly a bit “down and out”. I’m well aware that drugs and alcohol are banned but I’m not sure how strong this can be enforced.

Sunny – your obsession with left on left argument is bizarre. You can barely let an article pass without inserting some almost totally unrelated and unquantified attack on some other section of the left. It’s boring and counter-productive.

This might be of some comfort to you Sunny despite your offerings last week in

‘Why Labour won’t and shouldn’t have to endorse #occupyLSX ‘

Maybe a career in weather forecasting bekons?

However,you might be slightly placated by the fact that his so called endorsement was really nothing of the sort.

As an addendum perhaps you might like to define some of the terms you use.

What is ‘Ultra Left’ for example?