Will it be Mili-D? Or will it be Ed B?
Labour’s future revolves around a soap opera involving two political families.
By Mehdi Hasan Published 27 September 2010 13:30
I've been here at the Labour party conference in Manchester for less than 24 hours and yet I have to agree with the Guardian's Andrew Sparrow when he says that only two questions dominate the conversation right now:
- Will David Miliband stay in the shadow cabinet?
- Who will be the next shadow chancellor?
In previous columns and blogposts, I've speculated about David M's future, too. I suspect he is waiting till 5pm on Wednesday (the deadline for shadow cabinet nominations) because he wants to see if the party will beg him to stay on and serve on the front bench.
But can someone as confident (arrogant?) as the elder Miliband serve under his kid brother? "I really wonder if he'll be able to do it and whether he'll actually stick around," a close friend and supporter of his in the Parliamentary Labour Party told me last week. There was a pained look on the MP's face.
If he does "stick around", what does he do? Is there any other job for him, shadow chancellor aside? Will he want to stay on as shadow foreign secretary, having already done the foreign sec job in government for the past three years? Won't it be odd to have two brothers in the top two jobs in the shadow cabinet?
And is there, as the FT asks on its front page, a split between the brothers on the deficit, with DM backing Alistair Darling's halve-the-deficit-in-four-years plan while EM sees it only as a "starting point"? Or will Ed M go with Ed B, despite the silly claims from commentators that the latter "won't give Labour economic credibility". Really? Even though his position on deficit reduction is backed by Nobel-Prize-winning economists such as Paul Krugman and Joe Stiglitz, the FT's Martin Wolf and Samuel Brittan, and even the IMF?
I discuss the shadow cabinet elections in my column in the magazine this week, and I also make the case for Ed Balls to be the next shadow chancellor. I suspect David Miliband will wait a few months (a year?) before quitting front-line politics and going off to take a high-profile, high-paid job on the international circuit (EU, IMF, World Bank, UN, etc) because, in the words of a shadow cabinet colleague of his, "If he quits now, it'll look like he's throwing his toys out of the pram."
But if he does ask for, and get, the shadow chancellor's job from his brother, then that means David Miliband is in for the long haul, because Labour cannot afford to switch shadow chancellors in the middle of this cuts-ridden, economy-focused parliament. If he's not signed up for a full term, then I'd suggest Ed Mili create a new and nebulous position for him in the short-to-medium term -- perhaps "shadow deputy prime minister", facing off against Nick Clegg each week in the Commons, taking on the constitutional reform brief and helping formulate Labour's position on the Alternative Vote and the May 2011 referendum campaign. As I've said, I'd prefer that the shadow chancellor job go to the bullish Balls.
Now, others in the left/Labour blogosphere -- Will Straw, Sunder Katwala, et cetera -- suspect Yvette Cooper may be the best alternative to both Balls and the elder Miliband as shadow chancellor. She is a trained economist like her husband, but has fewer enemies than he does. (Plus, she is a woman and feisty, too . . .)
With Ed Miliband as leader, and the shadow chancellor's post expected to go to David Miliband, or Ed Balls, or Yvette Cooper, the future of the two biggest jobs in the Labour Party has become part of a "soap opera" (to borrow a phrase from Mili-D) revolving around two families: the Miliband brothers and the Balls-Cooper husband-and-wife.
Weird, eh?
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




















28 comments
Max - Loved the fact that you couldn't just leave it at the first comment and your fury steadily built up into you posting an arbitrary, off-topic rant about immigration.
I always thought you used the term "waycist" in trolling circles, but I'm not going to "shriek" as your post was pretty much self-condemning. Besides, if the moderators show any gumption, they will judge your epithet as inflammatory and remove your post forthwith.
Perhaps this lame-ass DroneBot can be packed off to Palestine and uphold Blair's todger whilst he very self-importantly rearranges the deckchairs in the Piss Process for the next round of middle-east war?
Since Blair became a glassy-eyed holy-high-rolling Papist who directly receives warmongering voice messages from the Jewish Sky-Zombie himself, he has taken pious vows never more to manhandle his own baby-snake -- but, as if by a miracle, the Boy Davey has just become available and will obviously jump at the chance once again to cradle and dust his master's right honourable member.
For reasons of everyone elses' sanity and moral health, this overinflated puffloon should never be allowed within a mile of any political post which might ever matter.
''they will judge your epithet and remove your post forthwith.''
Strange how the left twitter on about freedom of speech, but only when they agree with it.
And that is that.
I think if Mili D was going to stay around for a Shadow Cabinet job, he would be saying that he was putting himself forward when asked. I really think he will go. If he does go, then Yvette Cooper or Ed Balls seem the most qualified candidates, Yvette would probably be the better option.
The best combo would be DM as shadow chancellor, these are two bro's who would work well together. Whowever, becomes chancellor should listen to Darling's exit speech.
'' but I'm not going to "shriek"''
Dylan, If I hadnt reprimanded you in the first place, you would have shrieked racism, no question about it, marxists use the word racism, like a pig squeals.
where are all the personalities?
I'm beginning to warm to Balls I find yvette incredibly tedious
shadow dpm for dmilli is a good idea
though foreign secretary /international development combined ?
I note that you Dylan did not deny the fact of my comment, of liebores nefarious plan of turning England into bongo, bongo land because jiggaboos tend to vote liebore.
'' your epithet as inflammatory and remove your post forthwith.''
But you did shriek with fake indignation '' inflammatory '' didnt you, Dylan ?
Have you ever wondered, why opinions which the majority of people quite naturally hold are, if anyone dares express them publicly, denounced as 'controversial, 'extremist', 'explosive', 'disgraceful', and overwhelmed with a violence and venom quite unknown to debate? It is because the whole power of the aggressor depends upon preventing people from seeing what is happening and from saying what they see.
And Dylan, whats wrong with good old fashioned anglo saxon words like '' jiggaboo '' ?
Ps When you put out the racist jibe ( its just a made up marxist word to close down debate ) Im not in the slightest bit offended, its water off a ducks back, so you'll have to think up something else as a line of attack, dear boy.
Will it be Mili-D? Or will it be Ed B?
Quite frankly, who cares ?
It will be silly-Milly !
Simple truth to me is this D Mili needs to man up accept he lost and accept a job from his brother
Am I alone in thinking that David Miliband saying "This is Ed's week." is rather at odds with his taking all the media attention by not making his position clear? Did he really never think about what he'd do if he lost? or did he assume his coronation? I think most people would have felt sympathy for David on Saturday ... however, I'm now beginning to feel some compassion fatigue!
Lol IMF backing Ed Ball's on the deficit? That was exactly my impression when I read that the IMF supported the coalition's plans today...
This is a pretty key decision though. If he takes Mehdi Hasan's advice then he will have to pray to high heaven's that the economy goes back into recession or at the very least growth grinds to a complete holt.
If that doesn't happen then Labour's arguments will look very odd.
With Darling's plans you get cover whatever happens. If the economy does ok, you can say you could have gotten more growth. If it does badly you can say that the steep cuts ruined the economy like you had warned.
Ed Miliband seems to be pretty astute considering the way he played the unions to win the leadership, so I doubt he will box himself into a position probably won't happen.
Max - Either I'm suffering from déjà vu, or you just decided to copy and paste your above post three minutes later in this thread:
http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2010/09/simple-truth-mili...
Despite thinking it worthy of a repeat showing, you still failed to notice your incorrect usage of "There" the second time around. Instead of blaming "liebore" for your poor standard of education, you may find this quiz useful:
http://www.better-english.com/easier/theyre.htm
Promise not to cheat and only come back when you've achieved 100%.
There.
To quote Max on 28 September 2010 at 00:45:
"Will it be Mili-D? Or will it be Ed B?
Quite frankly, who cares ?"
Erm, maybe a Tory who is eager to have his point heard at a quarter to one in the morning?
Shadow DPM for DM is a good idea. And then out. Until he at least puts his hands up for overseeing a blurry (at best) approach to torture, he is unacceptable to me as a politician I can support - the primary reason I didn't support him for the leadership. Ed B for shadow Chancellor, no doubt.
David Miliband is considering his future? So standing for Labour leader was just a career move then, so defeat means another career move...? With the passing of Michael Foot those were the days when we had leaders with real conviction and dedication to fight to achieve social change and the Labour Party as a means to achieve it. Those were the days when Labour represented working people and the poor, not a bunch of spoilt, pampered middle class geeks, many of whom are Labour MPs.
Max - "And that is that." - didn't stop you from posting less than an hour later though, did it? Without the gift of clairvoyance, you should know that I can only be "reprimanded" for things I have said - not for things you 'think' I will say. Shame I don't have a ready link to another quiz that may help you sort out that distinction - I hope the last one proved helpful.
Look Max, it's quite simple really - if you want to assuage accusations of racism, then don't use deliberately seditious language in your posts. You sound like the type of person who bemoans the fact that they can't use the 'n' word, and will then angrily proclaim "Double standards!" when sections of the black community use it against each other.
I'm guessing the pejorative term you earlier employed was intended to invoke the mods, in order for you to then entreat that you're being censored. It's a phenomenon that's all too prevalent amongst vainglorious posters on the BBC's 'Have Your Say' website.
It has nothing to do with Marxism by the way. Try out the derogatory moniker you used earlier on any mainstream right-wing blog, and see how you get on. The mods will certainly be more judicious than they appear to be on this site - apparently only ancient Anglo-Saxon vulgarisms are deemed unacceptable here.
A good and wise comment is always worth repeating.
So there !!
Wow, the NS is starting to resemble Mili-pedia.
Wouldnt that English test be better in arabic or swahili since liebore brought in millions of jiggaboos in, to deliberately bugger up the country, the Neathergate scandal.
''The huge increases in migrants over the last decade were partly due to a politically motivated attempt by ministers to radically change the country and "rub the Right's nose in diversity", according to Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett.
He said Labour's relaxation of controls was a deliberate plan to "open up the UK to mass migration" but that ministers were nervous and reluctant to discuss such a move publicly for fear it would alienate its "core working class vote".
Mr Neather was a speech writer who worked in Downing Street for Tony Blair and in the Home Office for Jack Straw and David Blunkett, in the early 2000s.
Writing in the Evening Standard, he revealed the "major shift" in immigration policy came after the publication of a policy paper from the Performance and Innovation Unit, a Downing Street think tank based in the Cabinet Office, in 2001.
He wrote a major speech for Barbara Roche, the then immigration minister, in 2000, which was largely based on drafts of the report.
He said the final published version of the report promoted the labour market case for immigration but unpublished versions contained additional reasons, he said.
He wrote: "Earlier drafts I saw also included a driving political purpose: that mass immigration was the way that the Government was going to make the UK truly multicultural.
"I remember coming away from some discussions with the clear sense that the policy was intended – even if this wasn't its main purpose – to rub the Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date."
The "deliberate policy", from late 2000 until "at least February last year", when the new points based system was introduced, was to open up the UK to mass migration, he said.
Some 2.3 million migrants have been added to the population since then, according to Whitehall estimates quietly slipped out last month.
On Question Time on Thursday, Mr Straw was repeatedly quizzed about whether Labour's immigration policies had left the door open for the BNP.
In his column, Mr Neather said that as well as bringing in hundreds of thousands more migrants to plug labour market gaps, there was also a "driving political purpose" behind immigration policy.
He defended the policy, saying mass immigration has "enriched" Britain, and made London a more attractive and cosmopolitan place.
But he acknowledged that "nervous" ministers made no mention of the policy at the time for fear of alienating Labour voters.''
What a malevolent cancer liebore is ? and Dylan please dont shriek ' racism ' when I mention jiggaboos, its tedious.
Max - So, you're "...not in the slightest bit offended", yet you still feel suitably provoked to post an amusingly febrile message at half-one in the morning - "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
I had actually forgotten all about this thread - the topic question is obsolete anyway as, in hindsight, we know the answer to be 'none of the above'. I only came back here as I had accidentally bookmarked this page and clicked on it by mistake.
I am therefore wary of divulging you, especially as any sensible independent observer - though it's probably just the two of us - can see from your own comments, that you're already perfectly capable of digging your own grave. My response is more borne out of a mixture of boredom and bemusement on a Sunday evening, rather than any inferred "line of attack" - that would be merely extraneous... "dear boy".
I didn't feel the need to contend your copy and paste job entailing "liebores nefarious plan" because, as you well know, it bears absolutely no relation to the title piece. Instead it just comes across as a textbook example of trolling which, in this instance, didn't garner the emotional response you desperately craved. Save it for a future blog when it may become relevant, and perhaps we can also discuss how the CIA were responsible for 9/11 while we're at it.
If you look back at my posts, I think you'll find that I never actually "put out the racist gibe" because you rather foolishly showed your hand prematurely. I can illustrate your inconsistency by using a technique you're overly fond of, and quote your own sentences back at you:
"...please dont shriek ' racism ' when I mention jiggaboos. its tedious", and how about, "...If I hadnt reprimanded you in the first place, you would have shrieked racism, no question about it".
If you're going to supply me with queues beforehand, I'm obviously not going to want to dance to your tune. Sorry Max, you were always onto a loser with such presumptuous schoolboy errors.
When you say, "...opinions which the majority of people quite naturally hold", I take it what you really mean is the sentiments that you and your exclusively white clique espouse - assuming you have friends, that is.
These days, I think you'll find that the vast majority of the population - even my bigoted Nan - are able to discern what racial terms are deemed uncivil. Not even the right-wing press would dare propagate such outdated expressions anymore - it's called 'progress', Max.
Still, if you don't see terms like "bongo, bongo land" and "jiggaboos" as inflammatory, I would exhort that you "express them publically" in certain districts of London, Birmingham or Leeds. I hope to hear of your findings when your injuries have fully healed.
Anyway, in my futile attempt to drag this back on-topic Max, would you care to share your opinions on the appointment of Alan Johnson (Al-J?)? Or should we take it as read, that your raison d'être is merely to test the water on what contentious terms the NS mods deem worthy of censure?
P.S. It's not just so-called Marxists who have their own "shriek [of] fake indignation" by the way - ever heard the expression 'I'm not a racist, but...', or that old favourite, 'political correctness gone mad'?
''Erm, maybe a Tory''
Erm, you presume wrong, Red Ed could have read out the Manchester telephone directory and the liebore apparatchaks would have wetted themselves and squealed in delight.
Although I did find Milibandgate amusing when David scolded Harriet Harmful '' Why are you clapping, you voted for the war.'' There just liebore pavlovs dogs, arent they ?
P.P.S. I'll admit to my own schoolboy error Max, and should clarify that I meant to write 'cues' (meaning 'guiding suggestions') in my previous post. Instead, I mistakenly used its phonetic counterpart 'queues', which, in your eyes, translates as 'lines of jiggaboos waiting to flood the country'.
Won't it look a little strange with David M calling for party unity one minute and then "throwing his toys out of his pram" by choosing not to be part of the shadow cabinet just because he lost? Surely he has to stay on short term at least?
As a supporter of the progressive Liberal Conservative coalition party I am delighted....overflowing with joy...forgive me. Red Ed is so clearly out of his depth. We are all hoping Red Ed appoints Ed Balls or the delightful Yvette Cooper as Shadow Chancellor...superb. Even better, why not ask that Bob Crow fella? Enjoy the opposition benches...you are going to be there for a very long time.
It sounds, reading between the lines, as though Yvette Cooper may well support Balls' approach on the deficit.
http://bit.ly/cz76ix
This provides Ed Miliband with a way to adopt a far more sensible approach on the economy than that set out by Darling and adopted by David Milband, but without the potential toxicity of appointing Balls.
Apart from being a very capable economist, and apparently taking a more sensible view of the cuts than David Miliband, Cooper will have another strong advantage over Osborne: her keen grasp, shown from soon after the election, of how the Tory cuts will affect women. She can batter Osborne on this subject, potentially doing as much damage to him as her husband would.
"another strong advantage over Osborne: her keen grasp, shown from soon after the election, of how the Tory cuts will affect women"
She has another advantage over Osborne: she wears less makeup... There's a close-up head shot of Osborne in today's guardian, and the man's face is manifestly thick with foundation cream. They must have layed it on with a trowel. I don't know which of them is worse, FaceSlop Osborne or Airbrushed Dave.
D of I: I'm quite the fan of Mrs. Cooper, much less so Mr. Osborne.