The mystery of Miliband's caution

Andrew Marr and Ed Miliband Ed Miliband delivered pre-tested soundbites in his Andrew Marr interview

"A riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma".

Ed Miliband's performance this morning on the Andrew Marr show reminds me of that old description of Winston Churchill's.

On the one hand, the Labour leader has done what many have demanded of him. He has unveiled not just one policy but a string of them - a reversal of what critics call the "bedroom tax", the strengthening of the minimum wage and an obligation on larger firms to train an apprentice for every non-EU skilled immigrant they hire.

On the other, he spent his conference curtain-raising interview with Andrew Marr sounding evasive about many other key policy questions.

Will the public sector pay cap be lifted?

Will top rate tax rise, let alone tax on those who the party now says are not rich (ie those earning £60,000)?

Will Labour change its opposition to an EU referendum?

Will the minimum wage go up under Labour? Will immigration go down?

The answer in each case was a mixture of little more than a wish - eg "I want to see the overall level of immigration fall/minimum wage go up" - or wait and see - "we'll spell out our plans at the next election."

This can partly be put down to Ed Miliband's unwillingness to promise what he knows he can't be sure to deliver (after all the government couldn't tell you the tax or immigration rate in 3 years time);.

It's partly due to his natural caution but it's also to do with style.

The Labour leader seemed to regard today's questions as an invitation not to give an answer but to deliver a pre-tested soundbite on a vaguely related issue.

So it is that Labour risks unveiling real policy substance and still leaving people wondering what on earth the man who wants to be our next prime minister might do if he reached Number 10.


The announcement on immigration/apprenticeships - "one in, one trained" - is fascinating. It is designed to cure two problems that many have long worried about - the so-called "free rider" problem (big companies relying on someone else to train the staff they need to recruit) and British firms' addiction to hiring immigrants as a cure to skill shortages.

I can see a potential problem with the policy.

Might firms not just move abroad or outsource rather than taking on the costs and bureaucracy of taking on an apprenticeship each time they want to hire skilled overseas workers?

Won't a company that feels it needs to hire 5 computer programmers from abroad simply outsource the work? I'll pose the question and post the answer when I get it.


Labour's answer to my question is that a version of this policy has been tried in Australia but hasn't led to a cut in jobs. Australia gives firms that want to take in an immigrant the option to pay into a training levy.

What's more, one of Ed's policy wonks tells me, there are already lots of conditions attached to sponsoring a migrant (for example the job has to be advertised in the UK first) so there's no reason to think an additional skills requirement will be the thing that will trigger exit or outsourcing.

Nick Robinson Article written by Nick Robinson Nick Robinson Political editor

What a difference a day makes

In just 24 hours, Sir Malcolm Rifkind went from angry defiance to a grim-faced acceptance that he would have to quit his job as an MP and chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee.

Read full article

More on This Story

More from Nick


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 713.

    Sunday - Say nothing = mysterious caution.
    Monday - Say something = gamble
    Tell me Goldilocks - what exactly would constitute baby bear's porridge? (just right).

  • rate this

    Comment number 712.

    U2s 709/10
    There is only one reason necessary to vote Labour and that is because it is the only sure way to put the current administration out of our misery. Small print: Please be aware that I might easily be saying a similar thing about a different party if Labour were in power. The 'skill' of a Wilson, Thatcher or Blair in achieving re-election is all too often greatly underestimated.

  • rate this

    Comment number 711.

    John Bull 703

    But it wasn't the political elite who took us into the Iraq war, that was the work of one man - Tony Blair.

    Any way ... the Euro ... hope you've remembered our little bet of a while ago: me saying it will survive more or less intact, you saying it will either implode completely or shrink to a much smaller core.

    I like my position, do you still like yours?

  • rate this

    Comment number 710.

    @705 John Bull
    Agree, either that or the two Eds & rest of Shadow Cabinet & senior Party members have no real idea what they are about ...
    ... or, even worse, ...
    they are cynically manipulating the Labour vote with no real intent of serving & bringing prosperity to working people.

    New Labour were like that. How much of One Labour are OL' New Labour?

  • rate this

    Comment number 709.

    Oh no I wouldn't. I would like a lot of reasons to vote Labour. If a Lab Chancellor could say "I see the problems, I think I can fix them, I have backing of the leadership. Heres the schedule, it will take some time, other events may affect it but we will stick to the course if you back us" & plans looked realistic, credible & didn't exacerbate existing problems, they'd get my vote


Comments 5 of 713



Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.