Labour Party delegates gave hearty encouragement to David Miliband, the man who might have been king, as his triumphant brother Ed looked on, writes Mark Hennessy
FUNNY IN parts, passionate always, David Miliband’s address to the Labour Party conference in Manchester received standing ovations from thousands of party delegates yesterday as many sought to ease his pain following Saturday’s dramatic defeat in the party’s leadership contest.
Some of the reaction was sentimental, perhaps bordering on maudlin; but some of it reflected the deep hurt felt by many that their man had lost – and this in a party that is often too good at hating for its own good.
Preparations for yesterday’s speech had been easy, he said drily, since he had on his laptop “a couple” of drafts of speeches he had hoped to give on Saturday afternoon and again today, when the new leader gives his main address.
Some of it was, no doubt, drawn from thoughts prepared for today’s speech that never was, particularly when he quoted Labour’s fourth leader, JR Clynes: we have “come into politics not to practise class war, but to end it”.
Labour must not embark on a new internal war, the elder Miliband told delegates.
“When people look back at this conference in Manchester, let us vow today that they will say two things. First, the Labour Party learned its lessons.
“It learned to listen to the British people and it learned, above all, that, unless we are united, we will lose.
“And I say today: no more cliques, no more factions, no more soap opera. One united Labour Party taking on one divided government.
“There’s a second lesson – and it’s whether we spend our time looking inwards and backwards, or spend our time looking outwards and forwards,” said Miliband, who was watched and applauded by his brother from the stage at every turn.
In a message, perhaps, to those who fear that he will quit politics, or at least not seek a place on the Labour shadow cabinet, he said: “That’s life. So to those of you who have been coming up to me in the last few days – don’t worry, I’ll be fine.”
Tony Blair has already been in touch, urging him to stay on in the shadow cabinet.
Leading Labour lights joined a queue yesterday, saying the same thing.
However, the man himself is keeping his own counsel.
For now, one can only interpret yesterday’s speech as evidence he wants to stay as Labour’s shadow foreign secretary, marking Conservative William Hague in the post that he himself held under Gordon Brown from 2007.
Passionately defending the role played by British troops in Afghanistan, he insisted they were not forces of occupation but rather forces trying to prevent the occupation of the country by the Taliban.
Scathing of Hague’s performance so far, Miliband said the diplomats in the foreign and commonwealth offices were so much more than the salesmen and women for the UK that Hague wished them to be.
Some suggest he has already been offered the shadow chancellorship by his brother, the second most important post in opposition, though the political logic of that – as distinct from the need of one sibling to make amends – is questionable, to put it mildly.
For a start, such an outcome would put the two into near-permanent conflict, particularly since they have different ideas about how far the deficit should be cut and how quickly, with David more accepting of the need for cuts, however reluctantly.
And there is another candidate: former work and pensions secretary, Yvette Cooper, who touched all the right areas in her speech yesterday about the social damage that would follow the cuts.
Her promotion would, firstly, ensure that the British public is not faced with a surfeit of Milibands.
Second, it would promote a woman, and, third, it would ever so nicely ensure the future loyalty of Cooper’s husband, Ed Balls, the west Yorkshire MP who came third in the leadership contest.
Labour is all about families right now.
Despite the Milibands’ declarations of sibling love, relations are strained.
On Saturday, David Miliband’s wife, Louise Shackleton, was in tears. But she was also furious that her husband lost and that, above all, it was his brother who had done the deed.
Political wounds may heal; those within the extended family may take longer.