PMQs review: Miliband the radical outplays Cameron
The PM is still in the wrong place on the banking scandal.
By George Eaton Published 04 July 2012 11:54
The hope among the Tories is that the Libor scandal could yet prove more damaging for Labour than for them. But today's PMQs suggests they are likely to be disappointed. The endless argument between Ed Miliband and David Cameron over which party was more committed to "light-touch regulation" matters less than who is seen as toughest on the banks now.
Today, Cameron's continuing refusal to establish a judge-led inquiry allowed the Labour leader to play the radical. The key moment came when he said of Cameron, "whenever a scandal breaks, he's slow to act and he stands up for the wrong people". One of the poll findings that most troubles Conservative strategists is the public perception that they are far too close to the banks. Yet Cameron has missed another opportunity to rebut this perception. Miliband's declaration that the Tories are a party "bank-rolled by the banks" will resonate with voters.
Cameron seemed oddly underprepared for Labour's attack, ending his exchange with Miliband with the weak quip: "we've found the Higgs Boson particle. But Labour haven't still found a sense of shame." He can continually remind the public that Labour was too close to the banks but this won't alter the perception that he's in the wrong place now. Cameron eventually resorted to the argument that Labour opposes a parliamentary inquiry because it doesn't want its "dirty washing aired in public". If so, why does it support a full judicial inquiry? There was no one left to ask him.
The other notable thing about today's PMQs was how subdued Ed Balls seemed, his heckles muted, his gestures weak. The Tories will hope and Labour will fear that he was preoccupied with his alleged role in the Libor scandal.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















18 comments
Nice article..... interesting.
Goji Goji fructe goji
A big portion of the blame lies with Browns tri party regulation changes when he became chancellor. There was a lot going from shriek the freaks papers on lowering LIBOR to what DARLING highlighted about parallel treasury operations and ED BALLS spys in treasury. Actually there was alot wrong with power in those days.
In the middle of a book about Gordon Brown by a Labour supporter. No wonder Balls was quiet.
Brown and Balls were so close with Miliband not that far behind
If Brown can help destroy a good bank at a cocktail party with a Labour-supporting banker, to rescue a bad one, anything is possible as to what was discussed.
This story has legs and Miliband forgets the public are not stupid. Governments of the day get blamed even when the Opposition agree with them. Black Wednesday, Iraq.
Yes Michael, the public are not stupid. The Conservatives are the party of light touch regulation & protectors of the Bakers.
Yes Michael, the public are not stupid. The Conservatives are the party of light touch regulation & protectors of the Bakers.
Any Conservative who was hoping that Bob Diamond was going to drop the last Labour government in it this afternoon has now been sorely disappointed.
As for Labour being too close to the banks, it isn't the Labour party who are bankrolled by the banks and hedge funds, and those operating in derivatives, it is the Conservative party and the Tory cabinet is made up out of a number of ex bankers and many Tory MPs are also ex bankers and the City have bankrolled the Tory party to the tune of millions of pounds, so let's have a bit of truth and clarity here.
Sadly, whatever inquiry is performed, I fear we will learn little from either Party.
You would be hard pressed to put a blade between New Labour and The Tories, the rest is rhetoric.
Did all this banking nonsense happen under a Labour government? I forget as Ed Milliband is being touted as some kind of a messiah on here.
As you know, the Tories were arguing for less regulation of banks. So, it seems you have forgotten.
Quite right. I never understand why people talk about 'tribal' politics; it's 'football supporter' politics my team, right or wrong.
DC claimed Vikers separates Retail from Investment banking -- it absolutely does not. I got quite angry about this, since it should but like a few things the Government have made concessions to the Banking lobbyists and their cheque books.
Opposition parties call for inquiries into everything. Its not radical in the least.
Cameron need to explain how much his government has already done to tighten regulation on the banks. And what he has done truly is radical.
This government have watered down the proposals from Vickers, do you understand the term " radical "?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jun/14/vickers-george-osborne-ba...
Glad your back into the groove Mr Danger, with all the bad economic data out lately, I am not surprised you gone missing.
Foxy
Why do you think the Libor party are so senstive about a focussed review into their involvement with banking corruption. Do you think a good defense would be to try to move the review away from the issues to other wider more general areas for which Libor would be less accountable?
How gullable do you think the Libor faithful are?
In the absence of any information from Mr Cameron perhaps you could tell us what radical reforms the Tories have already enacted and what others are in the pipeline and when?
Many thanks in advance of your cooperation
Yes they have done something about banking reform: delayed it until 2017. How radical of them.
Ed Balls wasn't even in the Treasury at the time so I see no reason why he should be concerned and judging by his TV and radio performances today, he doesn't seem too worried to me.
I didn't understand that last jab either. Labour have the most to lose from a Public Inquiry, so why does the PM not have one? Unless he has a lot he wants to hide?
Maybe it will all come out, the whole funding and lobbying of the Tory Party from the City and Banks