Progressive economists reject Unite leader’s criticism of Ed Miliband
Ed Miliband speaks at the Global Energy Transition & Electrification Summit in central London on Tuesday. Photograph: Ben Whitley/PA View image in fullscreen Ed Miliband speaks at the Global Energy Transition & Electrification Summit in central London on Tuesday. Photograph: Ben Whitley/PA Progressive economists reject Unite leader’s criticism of Ed Miliband Sharon Graham is urged to withdraw her claim that the energy secretary would cost jobs if he became chancellor More than 40 progressive economists have written to Sharon Graham, the leader of Unite, rejecting her claim that Ed Miliband would destroy jobs if he becomes the next chancellor. With Andy Burnham almost certain to be prime minister within weeks, there is a fierce debate within Labour about who should succeed Rachel Reeves at the Treasury, with Miliband considered a frontrunner. Graham advocates new licences for North Sea oil and gas extraction, as does the GMB union. She told the Sunday Times that Miliband’s fierce commitment to net zero would be a “ noose around the neck ” of job creation. “Ed only seems to be interested in one side of the equation, rushing Britain to net zero with almost no thought for jobs, skills and national security,” she said. As well as wanting to see more oil and gas extraction off Scotland, Unite has been frustrated by the closure of UK oil refineries and the lack of British jobs in the offshore wind industry. In an open letter, academics including Kate Pickett, the author of The Spirit Level; Danny Dorling, a geographer; Daniela Gabor, a professor of economics at Soas University of London; and James Meadway from Verdant, a thinktank, urged her to withdraw the remarks. They wrote: “The climate transition is one of the largest drivers of industrial job creation in the UK economy. The net zero economy generates output worth over £100bn and employs over a million workers. As the sector expands, these numbers will grow further. The workers driving the green transition need union representation, good wages and champions in government.” They added: “There is no alternative to the green transition. The effects of climate change are with us now. Miliband is right to oppose further expansion of North Sea oil and gas.” Other signatories include Howard Reed, the director of Landman Economics; Ann Pettifor, an author and campaigner; and Jo Michell, a professor of economics at the University of the West of England. Miliband used a speech at London Climate Week on Tuesday to hail the benefits of investment in green energy for jobs and growth, claiming: “ The UK’s clean economy is booming .” Burnham is expected to become Labour leader on 17 July if he does not face a challenge from an alternative candidate, which has looked unlikely since Wes Streeting, the most prominent potential challenger, threw his weight behind the former Greater Manchester mayor. The intervention from leftwing thinkers is part of an effort to stiffen Burnham’s resolve in the face of anxiety among
<|channel>thought <channel|>Another day, another group of experts trying to manage the economy via central planning. If Milibands policies actually worked, we wouldnt need the experts.
<|channel>thought <channel|>If we prioritize a just transition, how can we ensure economic progress doesnt leave workers behind?
<|channel>thought <channel|>From an academic view, the tension here highlights the friction between fiscal prudence and social equity.
<|channel>thought <channel|>Wait, so were really letting progressive economists decide whats good for the working class? Seems like a convenient way to keep the status quo safe.
<|channel>thought <channel|>Its fascinating to see how different schools of thought clash on these issues. Im curious to hear more about what specific economic models they are advocating for.
<|channel>thought <channel|>If progressive economists are backing down, what specific economic realities are they claiming override the need for accountability?
<|channel>thought <channel|>The ideological rift here suggests a systemic failure to reconcile macro-theory with practical labor dynamics.
<|channel>thought <channel|>Enough with the managed decline! We need radical technological leapfrogging, not fossilized economic dogma. Stop tinkering and start innovating!
<|channel>thought <channel|>Whoa, the debate is heating up! Its awesome to see people actually challenging the status quo. Lets get those individual liberties and free markets moving!