ED WON!

"Labour didn't cause the recession."

Also agree - but Labour were guilty of failing to prepare for one. They fell into the trap of believing their own spin - 'No more boom and bust'.

Plus Labour saw the financial sector as a source of 'easy cash' to fund public sector growth, without unduly bothering the average British tax payer. And this was why they failed to regulate banks sufficiently.

FattyA- Lemsip was seen being delivered to him yesterday. According to Twitter .

Got to agree with Tada - Labour didn't cause the recession.
But it is true that borrowing had already increased substantially before the bail oit of the banks.
And yes, as a country we are and remain too dependent upon the financial sector...which is why Gordon didn't regulate them of course.

TI think one of the questions Ed must turn his mind to is, what can we replace the banking sector with?

Does Ed have a cold at the moment or does he always sound like thus?

Quattrocento- I tend to enjoy reading your posts.....

"Nu-labour induced recession" - we could debate this one....I think that it might be fair to say that the larger contributing factors were:

i)Global asset price bubble

ii)The fact that the UK's economy is not sufficiently diversified and is too reliant on Financial Services.

On the second factor, I think that you could argue that the structural move away from manufacturing to services pre-date Nu-Labour?

I agree that Nu-Labour and the BoE didn't intervene to stop the bubble but which govt in the world did?

Now that Adenoidal Ed is the Leader of the Opposition, do you think he will have his ptoblem sttended to?

Adenoidal Ed explained to us all today that he thought he would be doing his party and this country a disservice by not standing for the leadership of the Labour party. So I'm hoping he will take his substantial payrise to the nearest adenoid clinic.

The Great British Voting Public (GBVP) really do not want to be addressed at great length by a man who sounds as though he needs to blow his nose. Especially as a substantial proportion of the GBVP are now job-less or waiting for the axe folloing the Nu-labour induced recession

Adenoidal Ed is clearly blessed with a special sense of responsibility, that I know will extend to caring for the impact he has on other people's hearing.

Good luck for the operation!

yes, i think it was a good start and the speech came across well when i listened to it!

I was in the hall yesterday and his speech resonated with all parts of conference. It was well judged and his oratorical skills will develop. By the end he was hitting real heights and there were a few definite moments. It could have been at least 10 minutes shorter.

It was a good start. David's the day before was bombastic. He has thrown his toys out of the pram now hasn't he?

What is their mum going to do?

..... I just listened...Labour made the right choice, i think

I am listening to his speak...the substance...and I think that may well be the thinking man's/woman's politician....

listen here

His "personalising" speech style is certainly unique; maybe endearing but it also sounds a bit like a caricature of Tony Blair's style

yes, the dust will settle and it will come down to how he performs

I guess the problem is that he isn't the clear choice. It was effectively a 50/50 split which he won by a whisker. It is a hard position to be in.

Then again the dust will eventually settle - as it always does.

So EM is a riskier choice...but there is potential upside in taking risk as he is a deeper, fresher thinker than his big brother

It's ear;y days....i think the key thing is that Labour is less likely to win the next election as it will be difficult to assure people that he has the experience so young?

Litchick - it's Paul Mason hitting the nail - but he totally chimed with my thoughts.

What you saw at the hustings is interesting. I expect Ed M will need to adjust his ideas if he's to gain credibility with the wider public.

I think his choice of chancellor will set the direction. If he picks deficit denying Balls - then a lurch to the left and a vocal role in opposition results. If he pick big bro he'll get a more 'Darling' style of economic policy.

But, Labour needs to do so much more....

Poor old (sorry young) EM. I just watched the news and there was a rather a lot of 'faint praise' wasn't there. I wonder if it is because of the media 'hunger' for his older brother's charisma.

I felt sorry for DM too - it must be a hellish position to be in, the media are just as drawn to him as they used to be but he seems so awkward with their questioning now - poor thing.

As a Tory voter I'm utterly delighted. Just watching Ed on the news now, and he's got all the charisma of a wet tea-towel.

Oh, that's v interesting, JSB. Thanks.

Jackstar - you've hit the nail on the head.

The party is in flux at the moment.

Having seen Ed M during hustings, he made it pretty clear that he wishes to fight virtually all of the cuts proposed by the Coalition. Apart for the ususal mutterings about chasing up 'waste' in the NHS, I can't think of one cut he accepts as necessary.

Indeed, he talked about lots of new programs, which of course, will cost even more.

He also accepted absolutely no responsibility for the huge borrowing. This was placed squarely at the door of the bankers. When it was pointed out to him that the difference between borrowing and spending had risen dramatically before the banking crisis, he just blinked like a tree frog.

The reality is that he believes in big giovernment which means expensive governemt which means high borrowing/and/or taxation.

Now there is nothing wrong with that as a political standpoint. But it is light years away form the Blair administration and it will make the party unelectable.

This article from Paul (Newsnight) Mason's blog provides an excellent analysis of the dilemma facing Ed Miliband on the economy.

Paul Mason concludes:

"The unresolved debate within Labour is whether or not it can achieve the social objectives it believes in with a smaller state. If it cannot,.....then its concepts of equal access, universal benefits, healthcare free for all etc may have to be rethought. Alternatively it has to fight, overtly, for a large state and the means to finance it.

That is the real point at issue as the press - denied any guiding narrative by the new Labour leader - busies itself with stories of sibling rivalry."

...not voted for Labour since John Smith died.

I doubt I could vote for the party now or the foreseeable, as its rotten to the core with New Labour career cronies.

I think Ed M has been elected too soon, which is a shame really as I actually think he was quite promising. Really Dave M or Ed B should have been elected first, taken the flak and Ed M taken up the leadership in a few years when the party had the will to purge itself properly of the NewLab failed experiment.

I don't know whether I like him or not - will give benefit of the doubt until I have actually seen some more of him.

But in the clips on the news last night of when he won/immediate aftermath he looked absolutely bleeedin terrified. Like the rabbit in the headlights!!!! Blither. dither.

He needs to get his act together, and FAST!!!!!

And the fact that David is uttering the "well dones" through such obviously gritted teeth, and is sooooooo much more the statesman (but not necessarily the better politician of course) just makes for a great big bun fight.

OOOO, let's see how he does.

LOL, Redflower, unless his bro bows out, it'll just be Milibrand/Milibrand feuding in place of Blair/Brown feuding, rival camps, thrown phones, etc. Think David's wife is the most likely phone-thrower at the moment, although apparently David's camp are briefing madly against Ed all over the place.