He also proved why with a barnstorming speech at London’s Progressive Conference.
I meant to post this yesterday, to coincide with the day of UK Uncut action planned, but illness and Yes to Fairer Votes campaigning got in the way.
I’ve taken the liberty of transcribing some of it below, with fuller versions of the articles he quoted.
If I was Ed Miliband, on Monday morning I would hold a Press Conference in Church House in Westminster. I would invite all of the press: broadcasters, TV cameras, lobby journalists. I would flank myself with three men: Joseph Stiglitz, Paul Krugman and Christopher Pissarides.
And I would then invite Joseph Stiglitz, the 2001 Nobel Prize Winner in Economics, to stop forward and address the press. And he would say, as he said to me in an interview in February last year:
I say you’re crazy – economically you clearly have the capacity to pay. The debt situation has been worse in other countries at other times. This is all scaremongering, perhaps linked to politics, perhaps rigged to an economic agenda, but it’s out of touch with reality. One of the advantages that you have is that you have your own central bank that can buy some of these bonds to stabilise their price…[These cuts] would almost certainly lead to higher unemployment.
Then I would invite Paul Krugman, the 2008 Nobel Prize Winner for economics, to step forward and he would say, as he said last September:
The British government’s plan is bold, say the pundits – and so it is.
But it boldly goes in exactly the wrong direction.
It would cut government employment by 490,000 workers – the equivalent of almost three million layoffs in the United States – at a time when the private sector is in no position to provide alternative employment.
It would slash spending at a time when private demand isn’t at all ready to take up the slack.
Why is the British government doing this? The real reason has a lot to do with ideology: the Tories are using the deficit as an excuse to downsize the welfare state.
Never mind that British debt as a percentage of national income is actually below its historical average; never mind that British interest rates stayed low even as the nation’s budget deficit soared, reflecting the belief of investors that the country can and will get its finances under control.
Britain, declared Osborne, was on the “brink of bankruptcy”.
What happens now?
Maybe Britain will get lucky, and something will come along to rescue the economy. But the best guess is that Britain in 2011 will look like Britain in 1931.
Then I would invite Christopher Pissarides, 2010 Nobel Prize Winner for Economics, and he would say at this podium, as he said in the Mirror last October:
But no one doubts that the Chancellor is taking risks with the recovery.
These risks were not necessary at this point. He could have outlined a clear deficit-reduction plan over the next five years, postponing more of the cuts, until recovery became less fragile…
And his unwillingness to further tax the well off is inevitably necessitating more cuts to benefits just when the jobless will need them the most.
And once these three men had spoken, I, as Ed Miliband, would then stare down the barrel of the nearest camera and I would say, “Which of these three men, Mr Cameron, are you calling a deficit denier?”
The rest of the speech is worth watching, too. It’s brilliant. Medhi is such a brilliant speaker, and says some great stuff on the coalition’s muddled economic policies.
He also gives three ways that we can resist the cuts:
There is a March for the Alternative on March 26th. I expect to see you all there.