Is David Miliband set for a shadow cabinet return in 2014?

The former foreign secretary "is beginning to give serious thought" to a comeback.

When David Miliband was last asked whether he could join the Labour shadow cabinet before the next election, he replied: "You never know". Today's Times (£) suggests that the former foreign secretary, who guest-edited the NS last year, "is beginning to give serious thought to a return to the front line." The paper reports that "an emerging scenario would see him return to the Labour front bench next spring."

The return of the elder Miliband was originally seen as a means of shoring up support for Ed among the party's Blairites, but Miliband's recent political successes (the Budget, his "one nation" conference speech, the Corby by-election) mean this is no longer a factor. He would now be able to bring his brother back from a position of strength. The return of the former foreign secretary would add heft to a shadow cabinet that is short of big hitters. Since retiring to the backbenches, Miliband's interventions - on the economy, on the NHS, on multiculturalism and on the crisis of the European centre-left - have been among the most impressive from any Labour MP.

The question remains "what job would he do?" After Ed Balls revealed that Ed Miliband had refused to guarantee his position, the Times reminds us that the Labour leader has twice sounded out his brother about becoming shadow chancellor, once before appointing Alan Johnson and once before appointing Balls. However, it is hard to see Miliband moving Balls, whose stock remains high, before the next election. Having served as foreign secretary for three years, Miliband will have no desire to shadow William Hague (a brief Douglas Alexander has performed admirably in). More likely is his return in some election campaign role.

While the Tories now rightly recognise that they underestimated Ed Miliband, the return of David, whom many admire, would further unsettle them. For this reason, it is a weapon that Labour may well deploy in 2014.

David Miliband is considering a return to the Labour frontbench next spring. Photograph: Getty Images.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

The buck doesn't stop with Grant Shapps - and probably shouldn't stop with Lord Feldman, either

The question of "who knew what, and when?" shouldn't stop with the Conservative peer.

If Grant Shapps’ enforced resignation as a minister was intended to draw a line under the Mark Clarke affair, it has had the reverse effect. Attention is now shifting to Lord Feldman, who was joint chair during Shapps’  tenure at the top of CCHQ.  It is not just the allegations of sexual harrassment, bullying, and extortion against Mark Clarke, but the question of who knew what, and when.

Although Shapps’ resignation letter says that “the buck” stops with him, his allies are privately furious at his de facto sacking, and they are pointing the finger at Feldman. They point out that not only was Feldman the senior partner on paper, but when the rewards for the unexpected election victory were handed out, it was Feldman who was held up as the key man, while Shapps was given what they see as a relatively lowly position in the Department for International Development.  Yet Feldman is still in post while Shapps was effectively forced out by David Cameron. Once again, says one, “the PM’s mates are protected, the rest of us shafted”.

As Simon Walters reports in this morning’s Mail on Sunday, the focus is turning onto Feldman, while Paul Goodman, the editor of the influential grassroots website ConservativeHome has piled further pressure on the peer by calling for him to go.

But even Feldman’s resignation is unlikely to be the end of the matter. Although the scope of the allegations against Clarke were unknown to many, questions about his behaviour were widespread, and fears about the conduct of elections in the party’s youth wing are also longstanding. Shortly after the 2010 election, Conservative student activists told me they’d cheered when Sadiq Khan defeated Clarke in Tooting, while a group of Conservative staffers were said to be part of the “Six per cent club” – they wanted a swing big enough for a Tory majority, but too small for Clarke to win his seat. The viciousness of Conservative Future’s internal elections is sufficiently well-known, meanwhile, to be a repeated refrain among defenders of the notoriously opaque democratic process in Labour Students, with supporters of a one member one vote system asked if they would risk elections as vicious as those in their Tory equivalent.

Just as it seems unlikely that Feldman remained ignorant of allegations against Clarke if Shapps knew, it feels untenable to argue that Clarke’s defeat could be cheered by both student Conservatives and Tory staffers and the unpleasantness of the party’s internal election sufficiently well-known by its opponents, without coming across the desk of Conservative politicians above even the chair of CCHQ’s paygrade.

Stephen Bush is editor of the Staggers, the New Statesman’s political blog.