Ed Miliband’s speech on one-nation banking this morning was strong on rhetoric but light on policy.
The Labour leader has won the rhetoric debate on financial responsibility in the last few weeks, and he wanted to remind everyone of this, as he stood on a shiny stage in Canary Wharf.
But what he failed to explain is how he would make the industry comply with his philosophy.
He talked of how “the banking sector cannot be divorced from the rest of society”, but offered little in the way of marriage counselling.
The basis of his rhetoric was: “We need a banking system that serves a more responsible capitalism, working for the majority of people and enabling us to pay our way in the world.
We need to learn the most important lesson of the week: we cannot have a banking sector so divorced from the rest of the economy and the rest of society.
We succeed or fail together.”
But finding ideas about how this would be achieved from this particular speech was not easy.
Miliband said we should look at the case for a British Investment Bank, where government provided backing for entrepreneurs when the market failed.
But then he admitted that “goals” like this will be “the core of our business policy review”. So no tangible answers yet.
He called for banks to publish the details of all their large bonuses. But that was nothing new.
And he reiterated his desire for the government to implement rules that the last government legislated for, to make banks reveal how many employees are earning over £1m.
This was the basis of his attack at PMQs on Wednesday.
So, will people agree with what the Labour leader had to say today? Probably.
Will they be any closer to understanding how he would implement his ideas under a Labour government? Probably not.
Talking about the speech with a Labour friend afterwards, they joked that it was “reassurance banking”.
Rhetoric can only provide comfort for so long.
Wonder what brother David thinks…
Miliband is policy-light on banking reform
by Amber Elliott / 03 Feb 2012 10:15
The Labour leader spoke solidly about bringing the banking sector closer to ordinary people, but it’s not much clearer how he intends to achieve his aims













Comments
Clr Ralph Baldwin / February 03 2012 1:46pm
Labours strategy is clearly transparent, try and get David Cameron to do all things they would not do if in power, claim to challenge vested interests and place the public first. One problem the public do not trust them and the Leadership of the Parliamentary Party have point blank refused to address the issue of trust in the Party. I know because I asked Ed and Harriet Harman, Leader and Deputy Leader to try and clean up the PLp and they refused to even respond to me as a Councillor. They refuse to change and do whats right and place the public first because they want to get back to the gravy boat.
They want the Tories to be whiter than white for them because they cannot, they lack the strength and the discipline.
Kelly / March 07 2012 7:06pm
Asa labour Party bemmer from north of the border I am voting for Ed Miliband (thanks for reminding me! I need to do that asap!) Primarily it is because of the vision he has, he comes across as nice and not smarmy or arrogant (Mr Clegg should take note). But a big part of my choosing him is because he is less of a clone of Clegg/Cameron both of whom have tried to copy Blair in their appearance etc (and failed IMHO).I have no idea what his ideas about devolution or independance are which tells me he hasn't tried to be all things to all people (and we all know that is destination failure) but he did travel north in his campaign, so he must be interested?BTW Ed M has been my choice pretty much from the beginning of the leadership contest so I am not just going with the flow!