The London based City A.M. newspaper (among others) today rages against the election of Ed Miliband as Labour leader. http://www.cityam.com/news-and-analysis/city-says-red-ed-anti-business
Identifying Ed's support for a financial transactions tax on banks, a permanent 50p tax rate for high earners, curbs on executive pay and a higher living wage as threats to their untramelled wealth, bankers and lobbyist lined up to attack the new Labour leader. City bigwig Tim Linacre said: ”many of the policies he has proposed have the potential to drag Britain back very far indeed, and such an anti business position is madness".
On Radio 4 this morning, one commentator claimed that, despite the co-ordinated and very similar attacks on Ed Miliband, the Tory press was not a 'homogenous' group.
"Looked pretty homogenous to me", retorted the Guardian's Polly Toynbee, pointing out that 80% of the press was Tory. They would have mounted similar attacks on David Miliband if he had won, she said.
The consensus is that they are queuing up to 'define' Ed Miliband before he can define himself. Now, what with all the (of course unco-ordinated) stories that 'Red Ed' is a gift for the Tories, one wonders why they need to be so vitriolic in their attacks. Couldn't be they're a tad worried after all?
