Ed Balls and the importance of language

By Mark Ferguson / @markfergusonuk

Ed Balls’ speech today was always likely to receive an inordinate amount of attention. Balls holds a unique position on the contemporary Labour Party as the only politician not called Miliband who can instantly command media attention. Not all of that attention is positive – and he loves the limelight – but he’s a household name and a media performer. Those are in incredibly short supply at the moment.

He’s also, if we’re completely honest, the second most important member of the party after the other Ed – only Harriet harman would be likely to argue otherwise – so this was the second most important speech. Ed might not have complete control over economic policy, but he gives the impression that he does. Power is everything, but the illusion of total power is often as useful as power itself.

After some heavy trailing of the speech in advance, most of the focus has been on the apology. Yet that’s only new if you’ve been taking no notice of what Ed Balls has been saying over the past year. Perhaps you didn’t see this? Or perhaps you ignored it because it was politically expedient to do so? Either way I have no problem with Ed apologising. I encouraged it months ago. And if he’s being ignored then he needs to say it again and again and again. But let’s not pretend it’s new. It ain’t.

I’m also glad that Ed retained the general thrust of his economic critique. Balls clearly believes that he has the solutions that will get the British economy moving again. Economics is an art rather than a science, but Balls clearly believes that even in these strange times there are economic rules that must be followed. So far growth is falling, unemployment is up and the economy is stagnating. The Ed Balls critique isn’t just developed – it’s right. Changing that argument on the basis that we haven’t convinced the public yet is putting tactics over strategy. We need to be thinking about the economic climate and the newspaper headlines in three years, not three days.

But what has been little remarked on, and is more interesting than Ed’s reheated and polished apology is another phrase that he used in the middle section of his speech. It’s the kind of phrase that entire speeches are usually built around. It’s a sentence that could be the title of George Osborne’s speech next week.

“Fiscal responsibility in the national interest.”

Balls might not accept opposition critiques of Labour’s economic policy, but the use of that kind of language – effectively stealing the linguistic clothes from the Tories’ backs – suggests that he is at least aware of them, and the damage that they could do to Labour if not tackled properly. Yes, Balls thinks by and large Labour handled the economy well when in office. That’s not only understandable, it’s a gaurenteed applause line in a conference speech. But he acknowledges our economic credibility is a problem. He knows that the Tories currently hold the twin prizes of fiscal responsibility and national interest.

We shouldn’t let Osborne take those prizes without a fight. Balls shouldn’t just build a speech around fiscal responsibility in the national interest. He should build Labour’s entire electoral strategy around it – before we lose the argument for good.