Welcome to the New Statesman website. Please sign in or register to participate in the conversation.

Let Miliband be Miliband

The new Labour leader has no time to dither or prevaricate, but must act boldly.

New party leaders, as Ed Miliband joked in his conference speech on 28 September, are never short of advice. MPs, activists, columnists and bloggers line up to offer their words of wisdom - from tips on political strategy to guidance about hairstyle and clothing.

On the night before his big speech, Miliband was surrounded by a group of close aides and loyal MPs in the "leadership suite" of the Midland Hotel in Manchester. Fuelled with caffeine, "Team Ed" - led by Stewart Wood, the clever Oxford academic and former adviser to Gordon Brown - had been working for 48 hours straight on the text of the address. As the finishing touches were being applied, various people in the room began offering conflicting opinions on the tone they believed Miliband should strike the following day. Exhausted and exasperated, the newly crowned leader of the opposition turned to one of his advisers and said: "Let Miliband be Miliband."

The line is a reference to the award-winning US television series The West Wing, which portrayed a fictional, liberal US president and his idealistic White House staff. Towards the end of one particularly memorable episode, the president, Josiah "Jed" Bartlet, is confronted by his chief of staff, Leo McGarry, who challenges him to act boldly, take his advisers "off the leash" and "raise the level of public debate". "You have a strategy for all this?" asks the president. McGarry responds by scrawling a note on a legal pad: "Let Bartlet be Bartlet".

No right turn

The new Labour leader has long been a fan of American television. As a teenager growing up in the 1980s, he was obsessed with the soap opera Dallas. These days, his favourite show is the US comedy-drama series Desperate Housewives. But Miliband's decision to quote from The West Wing is as instructive as it is amusing. It suggests that he understands the need to define himself, rather than allow others - the media, the Tories, Blairite supporters of his elder brother - to define him: whether as the hapless "Forrest Gump" or the unreconstructed "Red Ed". "Come off it," he defiantly told a packed conference chamber, to rousing applause. "Let's start to have a grown-up debate in this country about who we are and where we want to go."

This was the speech that we had been waiting - longing - for a Labour leader to deliver to his party: intelligent, honest, bold and solidly social-democratic. It was not a speech that Tony Blair or Gordon Brown would have given, nor was it the speech his brother, David, could have given.

The Iraq war was "wrong", the Israeli attack on the Gaza aid flotilla "so wrong", the embrace of markets "naive" and the treatment of civil liberties "casual". He would, Ed Miliband announced, be a "responsible" leader of the ­opposition and abandon the disgraceful New Labour tactic of attacking the Tories and Liberal Democrats from the right on penal policy, counterterrorism and the war in Afghanistan. Optimism, not pessimism, was the leitmotif.

In the junior Miliband, Labour has a leader with ambitions to reshape the "centre" ground of politics. As he told me in August, in the midst of his leadership campaign, the Conservatives and their allies in the press "want to define the ground of politics on the right. It is part of our job to define the ground of politics in a different place."

He has a fight on his hands. The militant Blairites are disappointed at the defeat of their candidate, David Miliband, at the hands of his younger brother. They descended on the bars of Manchester to echo the warning of their guru, Tony Blair, that it would be electoral suicide for the party to move even "a millimetre from New Labour".

One ally of David Miliband told me at the New Statesman reception at Manchester Town Hall on 26 September, the day after the result was announced: "Ed's got to move right. He has to and he will."

Prior to the speech, supporters of the new leader to whom I spoke were worried that the younger Miliband, fresh from his victory, would indeed tack not just to the centre, but to the right. Few had forgotten how his two immediate predecessors could never resist triangulating on issues such as immigration and deregulation in their deluded attempts to ­appease the likes of Rupert Murdoch and the Daily Mail editor, Paul Dacre.

But Ed Miliband's conference speech, with its repeated references to a "new economy" and the "good society", to "love and compassion" and "solidarity", suggests that his centre-left rhetoric is a by-product of a sincerely social-democratic ideology, rather than a cynical ploy to win the Labour leadership. To borrow a line from Blair: it's worse than the new leader's critics think - he really does believe in it.

Sink or swim

Can it last? Will Ed Miliband stick to a progressive, Keynesian position on deficit reduction? And continue to advocate popular and progressive policies such as a tax on bankers' bonuses and a living wage? Key members of Team Ed tell me that they are well aware of the numerous threats and challenges that the new leader faces from inside, as well as outside, the party. "We are building a ring of steel around him," says a senior Labour MP and long-time ally of the younger Miliband. "We won't let the Blairites get to him."

The "phoney war" of the interminably long Labour leadership contest is well and truly over. The battle, between Labour and the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition, now begins. Ed Miliband had less than three days between being announced as the new Labour leader and having to deliver the "speech of his life" to the party faithful in Manchester. He will have less than 13 days to agree Labour's crucial policy on spending cuts with his new shadow chancellor, as the results of the shadow cabinet elections won't be declared until 7 October.

As with Bartlet, much depends on the boldness and distinctiveness of his political judgement. He cannot dither or prevaricate; nor can he afford to alienate the younger, idealistic supporters who joined his campaign over the summer. "Ed will either be the best leader Labour has had in a very long time, or the worst leader," says a shadow minister who knows him well. "He will either soar or crash."

Or, as Miliband himself recognised in his speech in Manchester: "Politics has to be about leadership or it is nothing."

19 comments

Daniele1's picture

E.M will soar, not crash, only if he dares position himself firmly on the left.
People in this country are sick of the "one party politics" that all parties have been playing since New Labour.That's why so many people are disengaged with politics. "What's the point,? they are all the same" is a phrase you hear all the time.The expenses scandal confirmed this belief even further.
Labour will win the next elections if they don't run scared of the right wing press and try to appease the "daily Mail". It is pointless and it won't work anyway. They have to be different and speak AND act to the left boldly. I think British people are ready for a real change, ready for a genuine Socialist government IF Ed is determined enough and stick to doing what he thinks is right . It is now or never! Labour must not waste that chance!

Jack Jones's picture

Ed can, and hopefully will, win the next election under Labour. He has got the vision, he has got the talent, and he has got the skill to be able to do it. The only question is can Labour effectively get its message out, not only in the face to hostile media (as alaways for Labour), but also the threat of the Blairite enemies within in? The term "Red Ed" does have a bit of a Mandy right to it.

global chocolate's picture

It will take a miracle to make labour win the next election. now all labour has is the protest vote all this attacking the tory deficit cutting plan while having no credible alternative. the age of right vs lef wings is finshed and the age of corporate democracey is in its zenith. all we can see come next election is essentially an election with no substatnce the labour you guys are talking about is dead the only way labour can win next election is changing its views on the deficit and while it has you guys as supporters i dont think so

kingfelix's picture

"I think they won in 1997, and THREE elections because they did not represent the Looney Left."

Are you a professional idiot?

People were disgusted with the Tories in 1997. They wanted a change, and, clearly, voting in Labour meant a move to the left. Or so people thought. How wrong we were.

But, to actually return you a sensible question, you dolt, do you think what people were voting for this time was the crazy right wing ideological nuttery of smashing up the state as a means of fixing the public finances?

Cretin, it's over to you.

Zole's picture

Just a few comments into the blog thread and already Luddite's talking bollocks.

stevem1's picture

The 5 million votes lost by NuLab is chicken feed when compared with the loss of people like me - pensioners brought up in labour families. People who looked to the Party nearly all their lives,people who were members of the party for years as well as being ardent trades unionists. I have been in my time vice chair of a constituency party. I have,nt voted Labour since 1997. The same goes for family and close friends. AS a member of the Party I always knew where my political opponents were I also knew who my political enemies were..They were ,like you Qamar right behind me,in the same party. Labour needs to re engage with the likes of me ,not least because we vote!

frenetic's picture

Yet again left of centre commentators omit one of the key elements of Ed’s (whom overall I like) speech: that on welfare reform he is willing to listen to the Condems and may work with them, though he noted the worry the new draconian medical tests brought in by Purnell are bringing to disabled people.

But NL's welfare reforms were all brutal with claimants facing extreme levels of harassment, cuts and sanctions and the Tories want to go further: this will affect millions of people many LP supporters voters. Its clear that M.P's during the L/E heard on the doorstep about 'benefit scroungers' etc, but that is not surprising after constant vilification by NL and a virulent media campaign of which the publically funded BBC has been very complicit with rubbish like 'Saints and Scroungers'

If Ed is a genuine social democratic he should resist these attacks on welfare, put forward a progressive concept of a new and fair dispensation and absolutely condemn reforms that explicitly affect already vulnerable disabled claimants.

Gideon Polya's picture

Opposing the Palestinian Genocide, Iraqi Genocide and Afghan Genocide is not being "looney left" but being a civilized human being.

So far Ed Miliband has a record of making decent noises on 2 out of 3, demanding an end to the Gaza blockade, protesting the Israeli Gaza Flotilla Massacre and declaring the illegitimacy of the Iraq War.

Obviously something rubbed off on Ed (if not enough on disgraceful warmonger David) from his anti-racist, humanitarian Jewish parents, his Marxist father and his pro-Palestinian rights mother.

In the Occupied Palestinian, Iraqi and Afghan Territories post-invasion violent deaths and non-violent deaths from deprivation now total 0.3 million, 2.5 million and 4.5 million , respectively, post-invasion under-5 infant deaths total 0.2 million, 0.8 million and 2.4 million, respectively (UN Population Division data) and refugees total 7.5 million, 5-6 million and 3-4 million, respectively, with a further 2.5 million re Pashtun refugees generated by warmonger Obama in NW Pakistan (that continues to be bombed by the US despite devastating floods that have made 24 million homeless) - a Palestinian Genocide, Iraqi Genocide and Afghan Genocide as defined by Article 2 of the UN Genocide Convention.

Ed and David Miliband's Jewishness should be utterly irrelevant except for racist Zionism (opposed by their parents) which has put Jewish people into 2 categories - decent, anti-racist , humanitarian Jews (like the Miliband parents) and those who support the Palestinian Genocide (and typically also the connected anti-Arab anti-Semitic Iraqi Genocide and Afghan Genocide).

Keep up the good work Ed, David is evidently a lost cause but but you still have a way to go on the ongoing Afghan Genocide and reparations for UK involvement in the Palestinian Genocide and Iraqi Genocide - just ask your nice Mum, I am sure she will agree with me.

If Ed ends up being the UK's second Jewish PM one hopes that he will be utterly unlike the first - Benjamin Disraeli (baptised an Anglican) was a racist, colonialist, imperialist mass murderer associated with the genocidal Irish Famine (1 million starved to death, 1.5 million exiled), Indian Occupation (1.8 billion excess deaths from deprivation in 2 centuries) , Indian famines (scores of millions deliberately starved to death by the British over 2 centuries including under mass murderer Disraeli) and extermination of other Indigenous peoples (from Argentinians Indians to Tasmanian and Australian Aborigines) in the British Empire (the British Empire was appropriately colored red in the maps).

Consult Jews Against Racist Zionism (see: https://sites.google.com/site/jewsagainstracistzionism/ ) and you will find this quote from outstanding Jewish American scholar Professor Jared Diamond who in his best-selling book "Collapse” (Prologue, p10, Penguin edition) enunciated the "moral principle, namely that it is morally wrong for one people to dispossess, subjugate, or exterminate another people" – an injunction grossly violated by racist Zionist (RZ)-run Apartheid Israel and its racist, genocide-committing and genocide-ignoring US Alliance backers.

Max's picture

''E.M will soar,''

Delusional, she should be sectioned.

Qamar's picture

I think they won in 1997, and THREE elections because they did not represent the Looney Left.

Post new comment

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.

Latest tweets