By Anthony Painter / @anthonypainter
Ed gets it. The simple fact is that this whole situation has occurred because News International has abused its concentrated media power. And that is now where he is intellectually and politically.
It is almost certain that News International will not be alone in having hacked people’s phones illegally. What is certain is that News International is alone in the degree to which it felt untouchable and able to take the practice to an industrial scale. It is alone in the way in which it was able to deflect law enforcement agencies. It is alone in dissuading politicians – with notable exceptions such as Tom Watson and Chris Bryant – from properly scrutinising its affairs.
It was systematic corporate corruption on an enormous scale. And it was all possible because of the power that had been accumulated by the Murdoch empire. The newspaper titles were the power lever as politicians feared them and officers of the law revered them. The stake in BSkyB – which is making somewhere in the region of £1billion a year – was the cash printing machine. Shame on us. We let it happen. Labour is just as implicated as the Conservatives and we should not forget it.
So to see Ed Miliband hit the analysis on the nose in his interview in the Observer this morning is warmly encouraging. It’s the right response. I’ve laid out more detailed arguments on how and why here, here, and here.
He is now driving the agenda again as he began to do in Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday of last week. He took a wrong turn last Friday when he risked taking the issue into a siding in a speech where he focused on the Press Complaints Commission. He recovered this week and is now setting the pace once again.
Quite amazingly, as opposition leader he has been able to define the conversation. A judge-led independent inquiry? His call. Reform of self-regulation? His call. Brooks to resign? His call. And now he is moving onto the even bigger picture. As a result of his performance his personal ratings are now touching Cameron’s according to ComRes and he has slashed the deficit with Cameron according to YouGov. What a difference a week makes. He has bought himself time, attention and space to define himself as a potential Prime Minister.
What he has done is move to the Ed Miliband Mark II that was so sorely needed after a floating first few months to his leadership. He is now – as Simon Cowell might say – a relevant politician.
However, it is critical that he takes the right lessons from this. If he listens to the silliness which seems to have emanated from his office to “Let Bartlett be Bartlett” taking its cue from the overrated political drama West Wing, then he will be straight back to square one. When you rarely get to control the agenda as is the case in opposition you can’t afford such delusional nonsense.
No, the lesson he should take from the last week is that you win the argument in opposition when you are on topic, clear, you have concrete alternatives, and you are operating in a context that constitutes a genuine political opportunity. This is what must define Ed Miliband Mark II.
You can’t for example be talking about responsibility on the day that the news agenda is focused on NHS reform. You can’t just simply wait for the economy to worsen in order to address your own weaknesses. You can’t be constantly fighting your opponent without at least a skeleton argument of what you’d do in instead. The tough lessons of opposition remain.
Ed Miliband has been mostly excellent in the last week or so – everything an opposition leader should be. He is starting to see the public respond more positively as a result. If he takes the wrong message from this then Labour will quickly stall. If he takes the right lessons then this could be transformative both for his leadership and the party. Over to you, Ed.
More from LabourList
LabourList 2024 Quiz: How well do you know Labour, its history and jargon?
What are Labour MPs reading, watching and listening to this Christmas?
‘Musk’s possible Reform donation shows we urgently need…reform of donations’