politics.co.uk

Ed Miliband is more dangerous than you think

Mon Sep 27 09:43AM
Moving left isn't the problem it used to be. The new Labour leader is the right man in the right place at the right time.

By Ian Dunt

There's a lot of nonsense being talked about Ed Miliband since his Labour leadership win. He's Red Ed, too far to the left. He's too geeky to be elected.

If it sounds rehearsed it's because it is. The right wing press, Blairites and the Tories have been practising these arguments for months. Like journalists preparing two different stories for the result on Saturday afternoon - one for Ed and one for Dave - they were ready to be deployed as soon as the announcement came. The conclusion is always the same: Ed Miliband can't win a general election. This is Labour retreating to the left, as it did in the eighties.

It's nonsense. Firstly, Ed Miliband is tough. He stood against his older brother, who was widely regarded as the natural successor. He demolishes Commons opponents.
He is able to articulate a given message well - particularly on immigration, a key weak spot in the Labour armour. He is likeable, which has an effect on the journalists who will try to tell readers what to think of him. He is not a left-wing radical. He was responsible for the last Labour manifesto, which was hardly a little red book. His policies are not extreme, unless you think Iraq, 90-day detention and ever-rising inequality constitute a centre ground. He has said nothing - precisely nothing - during the campaign which deserves the 'Red Ed' moniker which the tabloids are trying to anoint him with.

There is something geeky about him, to be sure. But we are not in the business of reducing politics to showbusiness just yet. We have been down that road with Tony Blair, if you remember, and the messianic turn he took should not be disassociated from it.

Ed Miliband is to the left of his elder brother, who the media and the parliamentary party wanted to win. The Tories were said to be more fearful of the centrist older brother, or at least that's how they briefed the press. This is an old and exhausted political assumption. In fact, the British political centre point has shifted to the left. The establishment, and certainly the media establishment, has been slow to realise, but since the financial crisis voters do not accept arguments about the efficiency of the market or the inequality of society. We have consistently underestimated the game-changing nature of this event. To brand Ed Miliband's approach 'old' Labour is ironic, because it's a view that's behind the times.

Many right-wingers secretly understand this. The financial crisis banished forever the view that the market was more efficient, more modern, than any alternative. It also brought the issue of social justice to the forefront of political debate in a way it simply wasn't during more certain economic times. When people's sense of aspiration is challenged, they are more likely to take a critical view of the rich. The view that any move to the left, no matter how moderate, is politically fatal is simply wrong. But it is in the interest of many of the people who propound that view that we continue to believe it.

The next election hinges not on charisma, or left and right, but on the 2010 Budget. If its forecasts are accurate, Britain will be recovering by 2015 - when we next go to the polls. If the coalition got the economic argument right, the public will re-elect the Tories (the Lib Dems won't get the credit - it's one of their many problems). If the coalition got it wrong and the economic malaise drags into 2015, Labour will benefit - but not if it is too consensual on the economic agenda. Ed Miliband can unite the left against cuts in a way his brother simply wouldn't have been able to. He can use the rhetoric and the momentum of public disenchantment in the most natural and vigorous way. David Miliband would have been more cautious, for fear of being labelled a leftie. If the coalition gets the spending cuts argument wrong, he is the candidate best placed to take advantage.

The mock anger about the unions' role in getting him over the finish line is similarly misguided. These are not dark union barons in secret smoke-filled rooms anointing a Labour leader. These are members, paid up, making up their own mind. They are not somehow exempt from constitutional standards of political association. The tone taken towards unions by much of the broadcast media over the weekend seemed to suggest they were innately malevolent forces.

In the Commons, Cameron is going to have some very tough times with his new opponent. Ed Miliband is an impeccable parliamentarian, able to use logical arguments, lucidly expressed, to reduce an opponent to rubble. As William Hague found out against Tony Blair, success at PMQs does not necessarily translate into success in the country, but it is a vital arrow in the quiver. It nudges voters one way while watching the evening news, if anyone does indeed still watch it.

His victory is also good for the country. Ed Miliband's views on civil liberty rule out a return to the bad old days should Labour win the next general election. For those of us who care about such things and who spent the last decade or more tearing our hair out at the way New Labour treated British freedoms, we can breathe a sigh of relief. We won't be returning to the darkness anytime soon. We should stay vigilant, but the battle is well on the way to being won. Break open the bubbly.

The leadership decision also marks a more significant shift in the political history of Britain. The defeat of David Miliband means there will be no return to Blairism, the strategy which consciously robbed political debate of meaning and reduced it to triangulation and strategic manoeuvres. Left and right are words which designate views about the allocation of resources, not tags to be avoided. We are tantalisingly close to returning to an era about ideas and debate. It won't be pretty, but with a coalition in power and Labour taking a more principled, left-of-centre stance, we are heading towards something more healthy and appetising - or so it appears.

Let's be clear. There are faults with Ed Miliband. He switched from Labour manifesto writer to civil liberties advocate a little too quickly for my liking, suggesting some chameleon tendencies. He comes across much better in person than he does on TV. He has not developed that intangible but vital quality of appearing prime ministerial. The first might be wrong and if not wrong, irrelevant. The second is surmountable. The third may change given four years of opposition.

The attacks will soon begin. The media will savage him, as it does anyone succeeding on the left, in a more vicious and aggressive manner than he had imagined. All intellectual arguments fall to nothing when the media succeeds in these tasks, because they create reality. If they convince enough people he's a limp leftie incompetent, then people will vote on that basis.

But my hunch is they will fail. If the Tories couldn't win an election against Gordon Brown, they shouldn't be cocky going into one against Ed Miliband, following massive spending cuts. Ed Miliband may just prove to be the right man in the right place at the right time.

Comments31 - 40 of 362

  1. Since WW2 politicians of all parties have responded to the a more educated? electorate. The days of compliant subservience, to an educated? elite, have long gone. With increased expectations politicians, desperate to retain their parliamentary seats, have promised and some times advanced universal benefits. Every party leader has delivered radical ideas that were revolutionary at the time, seen now as mistakes. Look to the future. "The moving finger of fate writes and then moves on"

    akfloyd From akfloyd on Mon Sep 27 01:07PM

    Report abuse

  2. Personally I am inclined to think that our current problems might best be solved by some barrels of gunpowder applied in the right position on 5th November.

    frankdineen From frankdineen on Mon Sep 27 01:12PM

    Report abuse

  3. Ed Millipede or what ever he is called has not a chance in hell of ever becoming PM nor in fact has ANY Labour member - they are finished as a political force. Idiots like Dunt, (I would like to spell that with a "C";) have no clue on how it is in the real world. The Millipede brothers would do much better in a Zoo or Circus as they have a close resemblance to Monkeys!

    mike.whitty104 From mike.whitty104 on Mon Sep 27 01:13PM

    Report abuse

  4. cameron and glegg will be laughing their heads of ,,big mistake by the unions,,it will a long time in the wilderness!!!!!!!!!!

    isabele.boldwick From isabele.boldwick on Mon Sep 27 01:19PM

    Report abuse

  5. Is it possible, just possible, to have a politician who does not see the world in black and white? Who was not raised to believe that any "ism" is the sole answer to the countries problems? Who was not cultivated in an insular elite that gives them the unblinking confidence that they are always right?
    Cameron/Clegg/Milliband are identical personalities, it's just the ideologies that differ.

    scoff662000 From scoff662000 on Mon Sep 27 01:40PM

    Report abuse

  6. Dunt needs to apologise for his basic error, 'Banking Crisis' not a 'Market Crisis', you Dummy! Just shows his incompetence and devalues greatly his credibility and to hang on anything he says in future will need to be taken with a pinch of chilli powder (salt not strong enough an analogy for his howler?), which gives a strong and biting taste in your mouth then gives you arseburn all day, like he does? Buffoon.

    vkct93 From vkct93 on Mon Sep 27 01:44PM

    Report abuse

  7. The usual DUNT-CE synopsis. Because we are in financial difficulties, the "poor" are geting a raw deal and the rich are total SH ITES because they did not spend all their money on booze or drugs or big new TVs or snobby HP cars or gay HP holidays in Spain. I am not rich. DUNCE would probably regard me as "poor". However,I regard myself as rich because I have learned over the years to exercise restraint in running a budget that I can live with comfortably, and to save a s@#$% or two for retirement. The "social justice" in that is that while the "poor" have been wasting their money away, they are now still eligible for all kind of handouts, and I am eligible for NONE. That is purely the result of Socialist policies which have led to national ruin THREE TIMES SINCE 1945. The next Milliband-wagon is saying the same things I heard from Stafford Cripps - "jam tomorrow comrades". The news is Dun-tce - TOMORROW NEVER COMES - not EVER with Socialism!!!

    scammell4er From scammell4er on Mon Sep 27 01:47PM

    Report abuse

  8. Ian, have you been smoking illegal substances ? The financial crisis was caused by greedy bankers. The rank and file union members are 'advised' who to vote for by the shop stewards, who are 'advised' by head office. Do your research on the union barons, their politics, block voting, financial investments, offshore banks and property portfolio. Ed Milliband was put in place by those same union barons. Instead of just skimming news get some investigative reporting done print the results here, so we can all read it. I suggest you read some of Chapman Pincher's book to begin with.

    geoffwoolley From geoffwoolley on Mon Sep 27 01:51PM

    Report abuse

  9. mkierznowski thinks Ed is just another communist? I fear he's just another Polish fascist who may not be too keen on Jewish people.

    johnorford From johnorford on Mon Sep 27 02:00PM

    Report abuse

  10. He 's a zionist terrorist supporter, his only allegiance lies with the terrorist state of israel..Not that the Tories & Libs are all that much different, but still....

    WAKE UP PEOPLE!!!

    tzimi2001 From tzimi2001 on Mon Sep 27 02:15PM

    Report abuse

Comment on this article

Please sign in to add your comments.


Add to my Yahoo/RSS

Latest UK news

Copyright © 2010 Yahoo! All rights reserved.

Notice: We collect personal information on this site. To learn more about how we use your information, see our: Updated Privacy Policy