If I were a Labour member, which clearly I am not, I would have backed Ed Miliband for leader. Between he and his brother, he has the capacity to speak human for some of the time. David for me is a bit too robotic.
I don’t sense a great deal of policy difference between the two, other than on Iraq. Ed says that he opposed the war at the time. If there were any evidence of this to the contrary, it would surely have been produced by Team David by now. The elder Miliband, Ed Balls et al were nevertheless clearly incredulous at Ed M’s position during the hustings however.
Ed is fortunate he wasn't an MP in 2003 as he would have undoubtedly voted for the war if he had been. Just like Harriet Harman, he would have just "went along with what Tony wanted". He wouldn't have been an evangelist either way, he would just have wanted to keep the peace as it were.
This brings us to the David Miliband–Harriet Harman vignette during younger brother’s speech. I don’t view Harman as a hypocrite for applauding the Iraq was "wrong” comments. Rather, it should be seen as an act of humility. One that needs to be taken further. For Miliband Sr to hold onto his position in the face of everything that has happened is stupendously stubborn. He whispered with fury “Why are you clapping? You voted for it”. As if no politician has ever performed a u-turn.
The incident sealed his departure from the front bench. It was clear he could not serve under his younger brother. There is no way Tony Blair or Gordon Browns’ speeches would have been interrupted like that. Even Ed Balls, Andy Burnham or Diane Abbot wouldn’t have seen a disrespect that was particularly reserved for younger brother.
Comments