If Ed Miliband is elected, there is every chance he will be the most destructive Prime Minister since Callaghan. Britain in the 1970s was like Greece today, except without the nice weather. From double digit inflation to trade union militancy, Britain was a broken spirited nation. Presiding over it all was Callaghan, a wooden and dull man, completely under the sway of the union bosses who frequently bowled up at Number 10 for the proverbial beer and sandwiches. Even the most reasonable measure to curb their power or change their conditions for the national economic well-being was vindictively blocked. The parallels between Miliband and Callaghan are chilling. Both were chided for being wooden and one dimensional. Both were heavily dependent upon unions. And if Miliband follows the pattern, his term as Prime Minister would be as economically ruinous as Callaghan.

Ed Miliband is only the Labour Party leader because of the unions. Their bloc vote in the Labour leadership election gave him his position. There is a saying in the American South – you dance with the one who brought you. That is, you show appreciation for favours, and there are few bigger favours to call in than pointing out Miliband is only leader because of you. So what favour will they call in? As the slogans on the petulant demonstrations the public sector militants organise state, “No cuts to public sector jobs, pay or pensions”. At a time when Britain must cut the deficit, maintaining the ludicrous perks of Ethnic Diversity Awareness Officers and Community Cohesion Consultants makes no sense.

When Labour were last in power, they swelled the ranks of the public sector. This was quite deliberate, as public sector workers are dependable Labour bloc votes. So Miliband is likely not only to not cut the sector, he is very likely to increase it. This will make an already unsustainable public sector bill even higher. As Callaghan found himself having to dance with the industrial unions that brought him to Number 10, Miliband will find himself having to dance with the public sector unions who brought him as well.

Miliband is also very different from Tony Blair. Blair had many vices, but being a socialist was not one of them. He understood that the way to keep Middle England happy was to make peace with the market. Miliband has not made peace with the market. Indeed, beneath his suit and Oxbridge accent is a snarling Citizen Smith waiting to storm the barricades. This is no more clear than in his exchange with a man in Blackpool. When asked

‘When will you bring back socialism?’

…he replied with obvious energy and enthusiasm in his voice

‘That’s what we’re doing!’

How worrying it is that the only time he has ever appeared excited is when talking about ‘fighting’ (a word he uses repeatedly in this exchange) for socialism.

As Miliband maintains and expands the public sector trough fund, and with Britain’s credit rating not allowing him to borrow money, he will use tax to squeeze the private sector dry. Many in the private sector, especially skilled workers, will grow tired of funding union and benefits bloc voters through increasingly punishing taxes. Australia, Canada and other English speaking countries will look like a good place to relocate then. Under 13 years of Blair, a time that was comparatively economically good, 6 million British people emigrated. That’s equivalent to four and half times the British people lost in both world wars – combined. If relatively good Labour financial governance can drive war-casualty levels of Britons to emigrate, one shudders to think effect the economic madhouse Miliband would preside over would do.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email