More leadership brinkmanship?

By Alex Smith / @alexsmith1982

UPDATE: The full article is now available here.

Paul Waugh says it’s a pitch for the left, a rallying cry to the rank and file and the unions in TUC week and just days away from conference.

Ed Balls’ article in tomorrow’s New Statesman discusses the direction of the Labour party, and certainly comes up with some worthwhile conclusions.

Balls says:

“We did not always strike this balance right: in public service reform, we sometimes sounded as though private sector solutions were always more efficient; and who can now doubt that, despite the tougher measures we brought in, financial regulation was not tough enough? Who would now dare claim that financial markets, left to their own devices, are efficient or inherently stabilising? Or that financial market regulation is always to be reduced wherever possible?”

This view isn’t new, but it is interesting coming from Balls, now.

I’ve seen the whole article, and it is a bit speechy and conceptual. It also covers much of the same reframing-of-the-Labour-message ground that David Miliband’s much maligned “leadership quest” in the Guardian did last summer, though naturally the politics is somewhat different. I’ve also spoken to people close to Balls about Waugh’s suggestions that this is “pitching to the left” – and no one has refuted them. So it seems that Balls is quite aware of what he’s doing – and he has plenty of experience in this.

But as I said the other day, I hope we’ll be able to discuss the future direction of the party (which is clearly desperately needed) without it becoming one of potential leadership brinkmanship. All cabinet ministers and all supporters who want to see a Labour government should be contributing to this debate – and we should welcome Ed Balls’ contributions as we have James Purnells‘ and Jon Cruddas‘ – and treat each with an equal measure of open-mindedness and distance.