Ed Miliband: Where the Man May Be Headed

ANALYSIS by Ben Mackay

Ed Miliband has won the leadership of the Labour in peculiar circumstances. Backed largely by the trade unions that make up a third of Labour’s voting population, Ed Miliband only edged ahead of his leadership rival and older brother, David Miliband, in the last round of voting. Younger brother Ed was nicknamed ‘Red Ed’ by some in the media and this perception was not helped by the manner of his election. Immediately upon winning he announced that he was ‘his own man’, and in his debut Leader’s speech he distanced himself from the Trade Unions by saying he had ‘no truck, with overblown rhetoric about waves of irresponsible strikes’. He wants a divide between him and the ‘Red Ed’ tag, but also as a young politician and from a different generation to Labour’s previous leaders he has committed the difficult act of both praising and criticising his predecessors. He has said that they were ‘wrong’ on Iraq and also hinted at a future Labour party more committed to civil liberties, saying that ‘too often we seemed casual’ about ‘British liberties … hard fought and won over hundreds of years’. Ed Miliband is trying to make clear that he is not owned by any one group or section of the party and is not stuck in the past. By assessing what he has said and his voting record this essay will examine where Ed Miliband will likely lead Labour.

It does seem that Ed is on the left of the party. Of course the idea that he especially left wing, some sort of communist ready to create Soviet UK, is ridiculous. He is just slightly further to the left of his brother, David. This can be seen from his support for a living wage, which would increase the minimum wage to around seven pounds an hour. Although inevitably unpopular with business this is a policy which could prove popular with many low paid workers and displays his social democratic credentials. However Ed Miliband’s approach on the deficit is very mainstream; there was debate over whether he would follow Alastair Darling’s plan to halve the deficit in five years or if he’d side with the other Ed, Mr Balls, and his argument for less cuts over a longer period of time. Miliband has gone with the former, showing that he does not want to appear delusional about the size of the deficit, something the Tories could pin on him if he isn’t firm enough about how to bring down the public debt. This is one sign that Miliband is placing himself on the crowded middle ground. He wants to be a mainstream politician and get away from charges that he is too socialist for Britain.

Ed is also at least hinting at pursuing concerns of people who were put off by Labour’s perceived authoritarianism. This a sign that he wants to reclaim voters who left Labour for the Liberal Democats, many of whom were disturbed by the previous government’s approach to freedom. Miliband has announced that ‘I won't let the Tories or the Liberals take ownership of the British tradition of liberty’ and criticised Labour’s use of 90 days detention without charge and also using anti-terrorism measures for other purposes. However Miliband’s liberal credentials have been questioned. Charlotte Gore writes,

‘Look at the detail. A telling part of Miliband's speech was the word "seemed", as in "we seemed too casual about [civil liberties]". Are we to understand the problem was one of presentation, not substance? As an unequivocal condemnation of New Labour's authoritarian thuggery, it leaves a lot to be desired.’

Furthermore a look at Miliband’s own voting record shows that he has supported measures which sit uncomfortably with liberals. For example he supported ID cards and also agrees with both the increase in use of CCTV and the DNA database. Miliband’s condemnation of Labour’s history with liberty leaves a lot to be desired.

One of the most controversial parts of the Labour conference was when Ed Miliband denounced the war on Iraq, when David Miliband was seen to angrily say to Harriet Harman, ‘you voted for it. Why are you clapping?’. Ed Miliband said that the war was wrong, as:

‘war was not a last resort, because we did not build sufficient alliances and because we undermined the United Nations’ and then he goes on to say ‘America has drawn a line under Iraq and so must we’. 

It is much easier for Ed Miliband to criticise the war because he was not an MP at the time and his insistence that they need to ‘draw a line’ under Iraq might suggest that his denouncement has primarily political motives – does anyone remember Ed Miliband criticising the war before the leadership contest? Although it must be said that it is a relief to see a Labour leader criticising how the war came about and also his support for a foreign policy which embraces countries other than just America.

Overall Ed Miliband seems, on early evidence, to be determined to keep Labour on the centre ground albeit on the left of the mainstream, a party committed to a credible deficit reduction plan and moderate economic reforms helping middle and low income people. It is also obvious that he wants to see the return of voters who were horrified by the Iraq war and Labour’s encroachments on civil liberties, however with the latter it is unlikely that he is to embark on a very different approach to his predecessors.